This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
RE: X32 project status update
- From: "Anvin, H Peter" <h dot peter dot anvin at intel dot com>
- To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb dot de>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, GNU C Library<libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, LKML <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>,"x32-abi at googlegroups dot com" <x32-abi at googlegroups dot com>
- Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 09:59:14 -0700
- Subject: RE: X32 project status update
- References: <BANLkTinM_=bAjD59=GiKtTvjLtoOs7KCFA@mail.gmail.com><201105211727.35985.arnd@arndb.de>
The eventual goal is to merge it with the x86-64 syscall table, although we're still working out exactly where we can do it.
-hpa
-----Original Message-----
From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@arndb.de]
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2011 8:28
To: H.J. Lu
Cc: GCC Development; GNU C Library; LKML; x32-abi@googlegroups.com; Anvin, H Peter
Subject: Re: X32 project status update
On Saturday 21 May 2011 17:01:33 H.J. Lu wrote:
> This is the x32 project status update:
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>
I've had another look at the kernel patch. It basically
looks all good, but the system call table appears to
diverge from the x86_64 list for no (documented) reason,
in the calls above 302. Is that intentional?
I can see why you might want to keep the numbers identical,
but if they are already different, why not use the generic
system call table from asm-generic/unistd.h for the new
ABI?
Arnd