[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100106174109.GA30528@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:41:09 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux@....linux.org.uk, dhowells@...hat.com,
ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp, tony.luck@...el.com,
geert@...ux-m68k.org, zippel@...ux-m68k.org, gerg@...inux.org,
schwidefsky@...ibm.com, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
jdike@...toit.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] generic sys_old_select
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 06:34:38PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 10:32:59AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 06:21:12PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Add a generic implementation of the old select syscall, which expects it's
> > > argument in a memory block and switch all architectures over to use it.
> >
> > Don't we want an ifdef around compat_sys_old_select() like the one
> > around sys_old_select()?
>
> Because nothing in compat.c does it. If we want to bother saving those
> few bites we should do it for more functions, and in a consistant way.
Actually, I'd be a lot happier if we had lib/syscall/old_select.c, instead
of cluttering fs/select.c with that. Objections?
--
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