[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231009141351.GD14330@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 16:13:51 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the asm-generic
tree
On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 11:00:19AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023, at 10:48, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 12:31:18PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> diff --cc arch/alpha/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
> >> index 5d05ab716a74,b1865f9bb31e..000000000000
> >> --- a/arch/alpha/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
> >> +++ b/arch/alpha/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
> >> @@@ -492,4 -492,6 +492,7 @@@
> >> 560 common set_mempolicy_home_node sys_ni_syscall
> >> 561 common cachestat sys_cachestat
> >> 562 common fchmodat2 sys_fchmodat2
> >> -563 common futex_wake sys_futex_wake
> >> -564 common futex_wait sys_futex_wait
> >> -565 common futex_requeue sys_futex_requeue
> >> +563 common map_shadow_stack sys_map_shadow_stack
> >> ++564 common futex_wake sys_futex_wake
> >> ++565 common futex_wait sys_futex_wait
> >> ++566 common futex_requeue sys_futex_requeue
> >
> > So this renumbers the (futex) stuff on Alpha, does anybody care? AFAICT
> > Alpha does not follow the unistd order and meh.
>
> Let's not make it worse for now. All the numbers since the
> introduction of the time64 syscalls are offset by exactly 120
> on alpha, and I'd prefer to keep it that way for the moment.
>
> I still hope to eventually finish the conversion of all architectures
> to a single syscall.tbl for numbers >400, and if that happens before
> the end of alpha, a different ordering would just be extra pain.
Fair enough; should we look at rebase those futex patches for this? (bit
of a pain as that would also mean rebasing block)
Or do we want to keep this fixup in the merge resolution and make sure
Linus is aware?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists