From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751316AbVJFTXQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2005 15:23:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751323AbVJFTXQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2005 15:23:16 -0400 Received: from smtp002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.33]:16033 "HELO smtp002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751316AbVJFTXP (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2005 15:23:15 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.it; h=Received:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=0AKPUXf6JQjA8bFycCfsvaZOkGaB5WBIvFt4kILVT59kJ/noQ45f5kffnp3rC14/GzAqdRcssch6H0H6TUuLGvGWq0pvmgAYHjDMDhb3kdWz5ji+Ut2ImA/OSZYRkj6tGY3/IoIU81+Yrna2gq6x92m30+HQnYGxhj63y5FU9Bc= ; From: Blaisorblade To: Daniel Jacobowitz Subject: Re: PTRACE_SYSEMU numbering Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 21:23:30 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 Cc: Laurent Vivier , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Dike , "Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso" , Bodo Stroesser References: <20050921172550.GA10332@nevyn.them.org> <200509222146.39172.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> <20050923151017.GA2558@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20050923151017.GA2558@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200510062123.31525.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 23 September 2005 17:10, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 09:46:38PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote: > > The fix is easy, IMHO, and not even urgent. It suffices to move > > PTRACE_SYSEMU def from to , and we > > didn't do that yet for laziness only. There's no architecture that I know > > of, apart i386, which implements SYSEMU (except maybe s390, but that > > isn't public). > Please either renumber it to something above 0x4200, > or make it i386 > private. I'm going to do this. > If you intend for other architectures to implement it in the > future, renumbering it would be better. Possibly yes, sooner or later ports will emerge, but this is already in production, so I have ABI issues. For new archs, I'll use the right range. -- Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894) http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade ___________________________________ Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB http://mail.yahoo.it