On Monday, March 25, 2013 04:55:17 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> On Friday, March 15, 2013 03:18:12 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > > On 03/15/2013 02:15 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > >> On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 03:58:23 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> > >>> On
On Monday, March 25, 2013 04:55:17 PM Paul Moore wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 03:18:12 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote:
On 03/15/2013 02:15 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 03:58:23 PM Paul Moore wrote:
On
On Friday, March 15, 2013 03:18:12 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > On 03/15/2013 02:15 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 03:58:23 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> >>> On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:21:43 PM Paul Moore wrote:
>
On Friday, March 15, 2013 03:18:12 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote:
On 03/15/2013 02:15 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 03:58:23 PM Paul Moore wrote:
On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:21:43 PM Paul Moore wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 03/15/2013 02:15 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>> On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 03:58:23 PM Paul Moore wrote:
>>> On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:21:43 PM Paul Moore wrote:
Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
On 03/15/2013 02:15 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 03:58:23 PM Paul Moore wrote:
>> On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:21:43 PM Paul Moore wrote:
>>> Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
>>> implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to
On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 03:58:23 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:21:43 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> > Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
> > implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000, that
> > could be applied to x32
On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 03:58:23 PM Paul Moore wrote:
On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:21:43 PM Paul Moore wrote:
Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000, that
could be applied to x32 syscalls
On 03/15/2013 02:15 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 03:58:23 PM Paul Moore wrote:
On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:21:43 PM Paul Moore wrote:
Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000,
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote:
On 03/15/2013 02:15 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 03:58:23 PM Paul Moore wrote:
On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:21:43 PM Paul Moore wrote:
Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the
On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:21:43 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
> implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000, that
> could be applied to x32 syscalls such that the masked syscall number
> would be the same as a
On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:21:43 PM Paul Moore wrote:
Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000, that
could be applied to x32 syscalls such that the masked syscall number
would be the same as a
On Friday, February 15, 2013 11:02:49 AM H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 02/15/2013 09:21 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
> > implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000, that
> > could be applied to x32 syscalls such
On 02/15/2013 09:21 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
> implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000, that
> could be applied to x32 syscalls such that the masked syscall number
> would be the same as a x86_64 syscall.
Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000, that
could be applied to x32 syscalls such that the masked syscall number
would be the same as a x86_64 syscall. While that patch was a nice
way to simplify the
Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000, that
could be applied to x32 syscalls such that the masked syscall number
would be the same as a x86_64 syscall. While that patch was a nice
way to simplify the
On 02/15/2013 09:21 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000, that
could be applied to x32 syscalls such that the masked syscall number
would be the same as a x86_64 syscall.
On Friday, February 15, 2013 11:02:49 AM H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 02/15/2013 09:21 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
Commit fca460f95e928bae373daa8295877b6905bc62b8 simplified the x32
implementation by creating a syscall bitmask, equal to 0x4000, that
could be applied to x32 syscalls such that the
18 matches
Mail list logo