On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 8:34 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote: >> 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? > > We can sort it out when we start merging x32 kernel changes. >
Peter, is that possible to use the single syscall table for both x86-64 and x32 system calls? Out of 300+ system calls, only 84 are different for x86-64 and x32. That is additional 8*84 == 672 bytes in syscall table. -- H.J.
