From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Wire up 32-bit direct socket calls Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 12:14:13 +0200 Message-ID: <2108882.tTxglVCXxY@wuerfel> References: <49726621.LPTnfQXYGz@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: Heiko Carstens , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andy Lutomirski , X86 ML , Network Development , Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho , Andy Lutomirski , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Alexander Larsson , Cosimo Cecchi , Dan Nicholson , libc-alpha , Rajalakshmi Srinivasaraghavan , Linux-Arch To: Geert Uytterhoeven Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Friday 11 September 2015 11:54:50 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > To make sure I don't miss any (it seems I missed recvmmsg and sendmmsg for > the socketcall case, sigh), this is the list of ipc syscalls to implement? > > sys_msgget > sys_msgctl > sys_msgrcv > sys_msgsnd > sys_semget > sys_semctl > sys_semtimedop > sys_shmget > sys_shmctl > sys_shmat > sys_shmdt > > sys_semop() seems to be unneeded because it can be implemented using > sys_semtimedop()? > Yes, that list looks right. IPC also includes a set of six sys_mq_* call, but I believe that everyone already has those as they are not covered by sys_ipc. For y2038 compatibility, we will likely add a new variant of semtimedop that takes a 64-bit timespec. While the argument passed there is a relative time that will never need to be longer than 68 years, we need to accommodate user space that defines timespec in a sane way, and converting the argument in libc would be awkward. Arnd