On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> General point: the first hunk here which wires up the 32-bit entry point
> should arguably be part of the "wire up i386" patch, not the "wire up
> x86_64" patch.
>
> This is not a clear-cut thing. The problem with the approach you've taken
> here is that if we wire up i386 and not x86_64's i386 table (for example)
> there are ways in which intervening patches can accidentally get i386 and
> x86_64 emulation's syscall tables out of sync. And, of course, 32-bit
> applications will run on i386 but won't run on x86_64 or vice-versa.
>
> So I think the best way to avoid all such problems is to always wire up
> i386 and x86_64 (both 32- and 64-bit) in the same patch.
Makes perfect sense to me. Since you've done it in -mm, I'll use your tree
as a reference from now on.
- Davide
-
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/
[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]
