[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2EOb+_aOSUqPuFpMoZYSuZv0v89XB-pWf5C7X3rnfOrg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 17:09:02 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>
Cc: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org>, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
gregkh <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
y2038 Mailman List <y2038@...ts.linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>,
Marcin Juszkiewicz <marcin.juszkiewicz@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/7] ia64: wire up system calls
On 10/11/18, Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 09:24:43AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 6:26 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org> wrote:
>
>> > +# pkey_mprotect requires an architecture specific implementation
>> > +328 common pkey_mprotect sys_pkey_mprotect
>> > +# pkey_alloc requires an architecture specific implementation
>> > +329 common pkey_alloc sys_pkey_alloc
>> > +# pkey_free requires an architecture specific implementation
>> > +330 common pkey_free sys_pkey_free
>>
>> One comment for all pkey calls would be sufficient. More importantly
>> it requires hardware support that ia64 does not have AFAICT.
>
> Except it has[1].
>
Ok, then we should definitely assign the system call numbers.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists