Nicholas Miell wrote: > AMD64 renumbered all the syscalls for optimal cacheline usage or > something stupid like that. I suppose the x86 emulation on AMD64 kernels > could share the i386 table, but then _NR_foo will have a different value > depending on context, and that'll just get confusing. Yes, the syscall numbers are quite different, especially because x86 has all syscalls, even the obsolete ones. But what I mean is that the __NR_ia32_* macros in asm-x86-64/ia32_unistd.h aren't used anywhere in the kernel. And in userland the asm-x86/unistd.h file is used when compiling x86 apps. At least this is how the kernel headers for userlevel use should be set up. -- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] prototypes for *at functions & typo fix
- From: Nicholas Miell <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] prototypes for *at functions & typo fix
- References:
- [PATCH] prototypes for *at functions & typo fix
- From: Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] prototypes for *at functions & typo fix
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] prototypes for *at functions & typo fix
- From: Nicholas Miell <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] prototypes for *at functions & typo fix
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] bitmap: Support for pages > BITS_PER_LONG.
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 0/5] stack overflow safe kdump (2.6.15-i386)
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] prototypes for *at functions & typo fix
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] prototypes for *at functions & typo fix
- Index(es):