From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262750AbTJJBex (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 21:34:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262755AbTJJBew (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 21:34:52 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:11222 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262750AbTJJBev (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 21:34:51 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 18:33:46 -0700 From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: davidsen@tmr.com (bill davidsen) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Fastboot] kexec update (2.6.0-test7) Message-Id: <20031009183346.3ae74277.rddunlap@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20031008172235.70d6b794.rddunlap@osdl.org> Organization: OSDL X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 9 Oct 2003 21:27:35 GMT davidsen@tmr.com (bill davidsen) wrote: | In article , | Eric W. Biederman wrote: | | Cherry George Mathew writes: | | | | > On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Randy.Dunlap wrote: | | > | | > > You'll need to update the kexec-syscall.c file for the correct | | > > kexec syscall number (274). | | > | | > Is there a consensus about what the syscall number will finally be ? We've | | > jumped from 256 to 274 over the 2.5.x+ series kernels. Or is it the law | | > the Jungle ? | | | | So far the law of the jungle. Regardless of the rest it looks like it | | is time to submit a place keeping patch. | | Forgive me if the politics of this have changed, but will a place | keeping patch be accepted for a feature which has not? Like the one recently added for "vserver" ?? #define __NR_vserver 273 and .long sys_ni_syscall /* sys_vserver */ (ni == not implemented) But I don't think that it's quite time for a placeholder syscall number (IMO of course). Eric can submit one though. -- ~Randy