On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 12:18 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > Every time I build a ppc kernel it bitches at me that > sys_sync_file_range is unimplemented. Shut it up... > > Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- > The compat bit is untested although the assembly looks right, when > compared with 32-bit calls to sys_sync_file_range(). Test kernel > building now, although I leave for the airport within 24 hours and may > not get round to actually testing it.
+asmlinkage long compat_sys_sync_file_range(int fd, int dummy, + unsigned offset_hi, unsigned offset_lo, + unsigned nbytes_hi, unsigned nbytes_lo, + int flags) Pants. It doesn't work because the 'flags' argument ends up in r9, and we can only use r3-r8 for syscall arguments. We'll need to do it the same way as ARM does, with the flags as the second argument. I _wish_ people would remember that not all the world's an i386 when they add new syscalls. And I wish Linus would refuse to merge anything which just says "I wired it up on i386" without even thinking about 32-on-64 compatibility. Once we've merged it, it's too late to change the ABI to be sane. Or is it? Can we ditch sys_sync_file_range now and implement a new sys_sync_file_range2 with the two 32-bit arguments first? -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
