From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751041AbWBGN3y (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:29:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751110AbWBGN3y (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:29:54 -0500 Received: from mtagate3.de.ibm.com ([195.212.29.152]:55178 "EHLO mtagate3.de.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751041AbWBGN3x (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:29:53 -0500 Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 14:29:49 +0100 From: Heiko Carstens To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: "David S. Miller" , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org, ak@suse.de, linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] compat: add compat functions for *at syscalls Message-ID: <20060207132949.GB9311@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> References: <20060207105631.39a1080c.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20060206.160140.59716704.davem@davemloft.net> <20060207174017.5e3b0ce0.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20060207093154.GA9311@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060207093154.GA9311@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: mutt-ng/devel (Linux) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Therefore I think Linus' suggestion with having something like > > compat_fn6(sys_waitif, SARG, UARG, UARG, SARG, UARG); > > would be better. Just that we would need something for pointers as well. > And to make things just a bit more complicated: only the first five > parameters are in registers. Number six and the following are already on > the stack. E.g. the compat wrapper for the futex syscall would need extra > assembly code to do conversion on the stack. > > Maybe having defines like SARG1..SARG6 that would define assembly code > instead of the register would do the job. Ah, stupid me... the SARG define defines assembly code of course. Just that we would need different defines for arguments that are in registers or on the stack. Is s390 the only architecture that has argument six on the stack? Heiko