[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704271436210.13605@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:37:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>,
Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 12/13] signal/timer/event fds v10 - eventfd wire up x86_64
arch ...
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> General point: the first hunk here which wires up the 32-bit entry point
> should arguably be part of the "wire up i386" patch, not the "wire up
> x86_64" patch.
>
> This is not a clear-cut thing. The problem with the approach you've taken
> here is that if we wire up i386 and not x86_64's i386 table (for example)
> there are ways in which intervening patches can accidentally get i386 and
> x86_64 emulation's syscall tables out of sync. And, of course, 32-bit
> applications will run on i386 but won't run on x86_64 or vice-versa.
>
> So I think the best way to avoid all such problems is to always wire up
> i386 and x86_64 (both 32- and 64-bit) in the same patch.
Makes perfect sense to me. Since you've done it in -mm, I'll use your tree
as a reference from now on.
- Davide
-
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