Re: [PATCH 14/15] arch: add split IPC system calls where needed

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 5:36 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:19 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:01 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:59 AM Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> > > > >  arch/m68k/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl     | 11 +++++++++++
> > > > >  arch/mips/kernel/syscalls/syscall_o32.tbl | 11 +++++++++++
> > > > >  arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl  | 12 ++++++++++++
> > > >
> > > > I have some changes I'd like to make to our syscall table that will
> > > > clash with this.
> > > >
> > > > I'll try and send them today.
> > >
> > > Ok. Are those for 5.0 or 5.1? If they are intended for 5.0, it would be
> > > nice for me to have a branch based on 5.0-rc1 that I can put
> > > the other patches on top of.
> >
> > There is also another change that I considered:
> >
> > At the end of my series, we have a lot of entries like
> >
> > 245     32      clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime32
> > 245     64      clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime
> > 245     spu     clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime
> >
> > which could be folded into
> >
> > 245     32      clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime32
> > 245     spu64 clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime
> >
> > if we just add another option to the ABI field. Any thoughts on
> > that?
>
> So "spu64" would mean "spu + 64"?
> That makes it more difficult to read, and to grep.
> What about allowing multiple ABIs, separated by commas?
> So that line would become:
>
>     245     spu,64 clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime

I agree that would be a nice representation, but doing this would
again require changing the script, which then in turn clashes with
Firoz' patches to unify it under the scripts/ directory.

       Arnd