From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=i6x1=N7=vger.kernel.org=linux-kernel-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C69FC43610
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 09:03:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23D9020831
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 09:03:46 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 23D9020831
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1726923AbeKTTbr (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 20 Nov 2018 14:31:47 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:59446 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1726039AbeKTTbr (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 20 Nov 2018 14:31:47 -0500
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15])
        (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
        (No client certificate requested)
        by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EB1EBDF7;
        Tue, 20 Nov 2018 09:03:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (ovpn-116-60.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.60])
        by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E24C75D75E;
        Tue, 20 Nov 2018 09:03:38 +0000 (UTC)
From:   Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc:     X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com>,
        "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
Subject: Re: Cleaning up numbering for new x86 syscalls?
References: <CALCETrVPcgKarpTOsdTfODkNA76W04WvW+tNWoOx6+Em0KS04A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Nov 2018 10:03:30 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrVPcgKarpTOsdTfODkNA76W04WvW+tNWoOx6+Em0KS04A@mail.gmail.com>
        (Andy Lutomirski's message of "Mon, 19 Nov 2018 16:22:49 -0800")
Message-ID: <87efbggly5.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.29]); Tue, 20 Nov 2018 09:03:44 +0000 (UTC)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

* Andy Lutomirski:

> 5. Adjust the scripts so that we only have to wire up new syscalls
> once.  They'll have a nr above 1024, and they'll have the same nr on
> all x86 variants.

Is there a sufficiently sized gap on all other architectures as well?
The restriction to the x86 variants seems arbitrary to me.

Thanks,
Florian