[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090912144804.GB14381@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 15:48:04 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch 1/2] ia32: use generic sys_pipe()
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 02:30:14PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 02:24:32PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > Please _ALWAYS_ mention the change in behavior in the changelog,
> > just in case someone ends up bisecting it. I only found out when i
> > reviewed the two syscalls out of caution.
[snip]
> > The generic version looks like the better choice to me but this
> > difference should be mentioned in the changelog nevertheless, just
> > in case some buggy app runs into this issue.
>
> It's not a matter of QOI, actually - sys32_pipe() is supposed to do what
> sys_pipe() would do on i386 host. So any difference in handling of an
> error case is simply wrong.
>
> Whether we want those sys_close() in sys_pipe() or not is a separate
> question, but we definitely want the same behaviour when 32bit process is
> run natively and when it's run on amd64. So sys32_pipe() has no business
> existing at all.
PS: said that, mentioning the change in commit message is a Good Idea(tm),
obviously...
--
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