[stable][patch] x86_64: fix number of ia32 syscalls

Recent discussions about whether to print a message about unimplemented
ia32 syscalls on x86_64 have missed the real bug: the number of ia32
syscalls is wrong in 2.6.16.  Fixing that kills the message.

Signed-off-by: Chuck Ebbert <[email protected]>

--- 2.6.16.17-64.orig/include/asm-x86_64/ia32_unistd.h
+++ 2.6.16.17-64/include/asm-x86_64/ia32_unistd.h
@@ -317,6 +317,6 @@
 #define __NR_ia32_ppoll			309
 #define __NR_ia32_unshare		310
 
-#define IA32_NR_syscalls 315	/* must be > than biggest syscall! */
+#define IA32_NR_syscalls 311	/* must be > than biggest syscall! */
 
 #endif /* _ASM_X86_64_IA32_UNISTD_H_ */
-- 
Chuck

"The x86 isn't all that complex -- it just doesn't make a lot of sense."
                                                        -- Mike Johnson
-
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: [stable][patch] x86_64: fix number of ia32 syscalls
    • From: Michael Buesch <[email protected]>
  • Re: [stable][patch] x86_64: fix number of ia32 syscalls
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Linux Kernel Source Compression
• Next by Date: Re: Was change to ip_push_pending_frames intended to break udp (more specifically, WCCP?)
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] s390: next_timer_interrupt overflow in stop_hz_timer
• Next by thread: Re: [stable][patch] x86_64: fix number of ia32 syscalls
• 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]