Re: [PATCH 1/4] Blackfin: arch patch for 2.6.18

Luke Yang
2006-09-24T03:49:19Z

On 9/24/06, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Saturday 23 September 2006 08:50, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > There is not much point in trying to use the same numbers as an existing
> > > architecture if that means that you have to leave holes like setup().
> > > I don't know if you still have the choice of completely changing the
> > > syscall numbers, but it would make it nicer in the future.
> >
> > we do, fortunately, have this luxury ... so we can look forward to a
> > nice cleaning of our syscall interface
>
> Actually, I have one more general comment here. It would be really nice
> if you could add those files that have nothing specific to blackfin moved
> to include/asm-generic. That would probably include bug.h, current.h,
> flat.h, hardirq.h, ioctls.h, {ipc,msg,sem,msg}buf.h, kmap_types.h, mman.h,
> param.h, pci.h, poll.h, posix_types.h, scatterlist.h, semaphore.h,
> socket.h, sockios.h, stat.h, termbits.h, termios.h, types.h, and unistd.h.
>
> It doesn't really matter if you're the only user of the new files,
> as long as they are generic enough to be used by every future port.
> If the files are specific to nommu, 32bit or little-endian, then
> they should probably have the respective name so the next person can
> do it differently.
>
> For unistd.h, it may be a good idea to leave space for a few syscall
> numbers specific to architectures, so you could start the generic numbers
> at 32 or so.
>
> Of course nobody is forcing you do do that work, but the next person
> trying to do will be really thankful.
Yes I agree that there are many arch header files can be put into the
generic folder. We just simplely followed other architectures. But I
will be glad to help doing this work.
>
> Arnd <><
>

--
Best regards,
Luke Yang
luke.adi@gmail.com