User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Re: [PATCH] nextfd(2)

From:  Arnd Bergmann <arnd-AT-arndb.de>
To:  "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-AT-zytor.com>
Subject:  Re: [PATCH] nextfd(2)
Date:  Wed, 4 Apr 2012 12:13:22 +0000
Message-ID:  <201204041213.22333.arnd@arndb.de>
Cc:  Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan-AT-gmail.com>, akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org, viro-AT-zeniv.linux.org.uk, torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org, drepper-AT-gmail.com, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel-AT-vger.kernel.org
Archive-link:  Article

On Sunday 01 April 2012, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 04/01/2012 12:21 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Sunday 01 April 2012, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> >>  arch/x86/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl |    1 +
> >>  arch/x86/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl |    1 +
> >>  fs/Makefile                      |    1 +
> >>  fs/nextfd.c                      |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  include/linux/syscalls.h         |    1 +
> >>  5 files changed, 31 insertions(+)
> > 
> > I don't have any comments on the syscall itself, but when you add one, please
> > also make the change to include/asm-generic/unistd.h so it appears in the
> > various architectures using the generic syscall table.
> 
> Arnd: do you have any interest in leveraging the syscall scripts I did
> for x86?  I have tried to make them as generic as possible, with the
> hope of getting more and more of syscall information into more easily
> processed form.

Sounds interesting, but I'm not planning to do the changes myself,
especially since I have no machine that actually uses the generic
syscall table.

Maybe I should ask the next person who submits a new architecture to
do that work, that's usually how progress in asm-generic happens
these days ;-)

	Arnd


(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2012, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds