Re: RFD: x32 ABI system call numbers

[Valdis . Kletnieks]

On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 09:40:55 PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" said:
> Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote:
> 
> >On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 10:41:16 +0200, Arnd Bergmann said:
> >
> >(Admittedly, I'm tuning in late on this discussion, but...)
> >
> >> For the ioctl interface however, the __u64/__s64 type in the x32 ABI
> >> must be defined with __attribute__((packed,aligned(4))) to match what
> >> the kernel implements because it emulates the x86-32 ABI.
> >
> >Is this a cast-in-stone issue, or is it still not too late to change that?
> >And if we change that, can we simplify anything?
> 
> The complexity of changing that would be enormous.

Oh, I know changing the x86-32 ABI is impossible - I meant changing the
decision to emulate that ABI (as opposed to emulating the x86-64 ABI, or a
variant thereof, or something else).  Or are we already commited to that
route, even if we're still trying to figure out what syscalls to include?

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature