linux-kernel - Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <E1HFhck-0008J9-KG@flower>
Date:	Sat, 10 Feb 2007 03:05:58 +0100
From:	Oleg Verych <olecom@...wer.upol.cz>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...nvz.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, drepper@...hat.com
Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21

> From: Russell King
> Newsgroups: gmane.linux.kernel
> Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21
> Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 22:03:27 +0000
[]
> However:
>
> sys_foo(int a, int c, unsigned long long b, unsigned long long d)
>
> is entirely reasonable and leaves us with spare room for one additional
> 32-bit arg to be passed.
>
>> Is that actually written anywhere, and does anyone bother to check?
>
> Mostly mailing list archives I'd guess.  As far as anyone bothering
> to check, that's me when I'm aware of new syscalls... which typically
> happens a long time after the syscalls have been introduced on x86
> etc.

Why not to have "the most large argument first" rule here?

  sys_bar(largest,..., larger,..., smaller,..., small);

Put it in Documentation/ABI/README and bother only, when compiller
will bark on -mm tree.

____
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/