On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 04:43:39PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 04:39:16PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 04:09:52PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> >
> > > Crikey, Alpha's syscall table is a right mess.
> >
> > I don't know anything about alpha, but does the kernel actually
> > implement those OSF syscalls ? If not, it's unlikely we're going to
> > implement them in trinity, so we could probably do the same thing we did
> > on ia64, and
> >
> > #define SYSCALL_OFFSET 300 and skip all those ni_syscall entries.
> >
> > Or am I missing something ?
>
> Well, fork() is still syscall number 2, for example. I don't think we can
> tidy this up with a simple offset unfortunately :(
Ah, I missed that. Now I see why you said it was a mess. Ok, I'll apply your
patch as is.
thanks,
Dave
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe trinity" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
