[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141112120549.GA4042@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 12:05:49 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"roland@...k.frob.com" <roland@...k.frob.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] ptrace: add generic SET_SYSCALL request
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:19:26PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 November 2014 11:13:52 Will Deacon wrote:
> > Just do arm64. We already have the dedicated request for arch/arm/.
>
> I wonder if we should define NT_ARM64_SYSTEM_CALL to the same value
> as NT_S390_SYSTEM_CALL (0x307), or even define it as an architecture-
> independent NT_SYSTEM_CALL number with that value, so other architectures
> don't have to introduce new types when they also want to implement it.
That would be a sane thing to do, so that tools which want to get at
this information can do in an almost standardised way for architectures
implementing this method.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
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