On 11/17/21 09:32, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 11/17/21 9:23 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >> On 11/16/21 12:02, Richard Henderson wrote: >>> From: Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> >>> >>> FreeBSD system calls return positive errno. On the 4 hosts for >>> which we have support, error is indicated by the C bit set or clear. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> >>> [rth: Rebase on new safe_syscall_base api; add #error check.] >>> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> common-user/host/aarch64/safe-syscall.inc.S | 12 +++++++++++- >>> common-user/host/arm/safe-syscall.inc.S | 11 +++++++++++ >> >> Can we split this in 2 patches? >> >>> common-user/host/i386/safe-syscall.inc.S | 10 ++++++++++ >>> common-user/host/x86_64/safe-syscall.inc.S | 10 ++++++++++ >>> 4 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Why 2?
Personal brain limitation, it is easier to me when I focus on one base arch at a time. Previous mips/sparc64 changes are in different patches. > They're small enough that I think having them all together is fine, but > otherwise why wouldn't I split to 4? 4 is even better for my brain, but I think I could force my brain to focus in 1 hunk at a time in a single patch :)
