Re: IRQ vector assignment for system call exception

yes, definetely a historical reason. System libraries need to know
this vector to invoke system call.

-Gaurav


On 12/8/05, yen <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi:
>    I have a quwstion. Why the number 128 is reserver for system call exception in
> interrupt vectors? Why not other numbers? Are there any historical reasons?
> thanks.
>
> --
> Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org)
>
> -
> 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/
>


--
- Gaurav
my blog: http://lkdp.blogspot.com/
--
-
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: IRQ vector assignment for system call exception
  - From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>

References:
- IRQ vector assignment for system call exception
  - From: "yen" <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: [patch -mm] scheduler cache hot autodetect, isolcpus fix
Next by Date: [RFC/RFT] swsusp: image size tunable (was: Re: [PATCH][mm] swsusp: limit image size)
Previous by thread: Re: IRQ vector assignment for system call exception
Next by thread: Re: IRQ vector assignment for system call exception
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]