Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Date | Fri, 18 Jan 2019 20:33:25 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 29/29] y2038: add 64-bit time_t syscalls to all 32-bit architectures |
| |
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 7:50 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 8:25 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > - Once we get to 512, we clash with the x32 numbers (unless > > we remove x32 support first), and probably have to skip > > a few more. I also considered using the 512..547 space > > for 32-bit-only calls (which never clash with x32), but > > that also seems to add a bit of complexity. > > I have a patch that I'll send soon to make x32 use its own table. As > far as I'm concerned, 547 is *it*. 548 is just a normal number and is > not special. But let's please not reuse 512..547 for other purposes > on x86 variants -- that way lies even more confusion, IMO.
Fair enough, the space for those numbers is cheap enough here. I take it you mean we also should not reuse that number space if we were to decide to remove x32 soon, but you are not worried about clashing with arch/alpha when everything else uses consistent numbers?
Arnd
| |