Re: IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64

On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 01:50:15AM -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
 > On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 10:35:28AM +0200, dragoran wrote:
 > 
 > > IA32 syscall 311 from mozilla-xremote not implemented
 > > IA32 syscall 311 from firefox-bin not implemented
 > > IA32 syscall 311 from mplayer not implemented
 > > what is syscall 311  and what effect does this have?
 > 
 > sys_set_robust_list, I think it's futex related
 > 
 > > I am using 2.6.16-1.2111_FC5 (2.6.16.14)
 > 
 > probably best to bitch to Red Hat about this

It's a glibc problem really. They started using that syscall,
and 2.6.16 doesn't have it.  I might backport it to our next
.16 update just to shut it up if .17 takes much longer.

		Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64
    • From: "Ulrich Drepper" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64
    • From: dragoran <[email protected]>
  • Re: IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64
    • From: Chris Wedgwood <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 4/6] Have x86_64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 4/6] Have x86_64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes
• Previous by thread: Re: IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64
• Next by thread: Re: IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]