[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070210102205.GB8145@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:22:05 +0100
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>, ralf@...ux-mips.org,
linux-mips@...ux-mips.org
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...nvz.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 02:50:12PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 13:45 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > I would strongly recommend that in the general case, you don't merge new
> > > > system calls unless the corresponding compat_ system call is
> > > > implemented.
> > >
> > > Good point.
> >
> > It's a _damn_ good point, but I see we went ahead and merged
> > sys_epoll_pwait without it anyway -- despite the fact that it's
> > include/linux/eventpoll.h which contains the example of why we should
> > think first :)
> >
> > I think I even threw together an untested implementation of
> > compat_sys_epoll_pwait() at one point to assist with that task, but it
> > didn't seem to help much.
>
> Damn! I always forget. Doing it right now ...
Which remembers me that I think that MIPS is using the non-compat version
of sys_epoll_pwait for compat syscalls. But maybe MIPS doesn't need a compat
syscall for some reason. Dunno.
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists