Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 14/19] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it | Date | Mon, 30 Nov 2015 22:49:43 +0100 |
| |
On Monday 30 November 2015 23:21:41 Yury Norov wrote: > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 04:34:22PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Tuesday 17 November 2015 22:57:52 Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Wednesday 18 November 2015 00:16:54 Yury Norov wrote: > > > > From: Andrew Pinski <apinski@cavium.com> > > > > > > > > Add a separate syscall-table for ILP32, which dispatches either to native > > > > LP64 system call implementation or to compat-syscalls, as appropriate. > > > > > > I like it much better than the previous version, thanks for the rework! > > > > Hi Yuri, > > > > you must have missed my reply below. Are you still working on ilp32 > > or did you drop this thread because you got distracted with something > > else? > > > > I didn't miss it, and I continue with ILP32. I really appreciate your > attention and time you spend on ILP32. > > There's a tricky bug with signal stack, that Andreas also discovered. > It makes almost all tests that use posix threads crash. I want to fix > it and other bugs before next submission. > > I also update glibc to follow all recommendations, and I want to > upload it together with kernel patches.
Ok. As a reviewer, I find long waits between submissions a bit annoying because that means I have already forgotten everything I commented on the previous time.
Could we try to get consensus on how the syscall ABI should look before you start adapting glibc to another intermediate version? I think that would also save you duplicate work, as it's always possible that we misunderstand each other in the review. Also, when someone asks you questions during a review, please reply to those questions so we can get a common understanding of the facts and document that in the mail archives.
Arnd
| |