On 9/14/06, Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:
> I guess that should be deleted then?
Yes. I will delete it right now. Thanks for the notice.
Er, OK. This means I can't patch it without conflict.
Mind just adding the six lines of code needed for
support of regparm(3) apps?
> Currently you remap signals. Whatever you do this for
> regparm(0) should also be done for regparm(3).
Not sure I parse you here. You're asking how to fix the regparm(3)
case?
No. I'd thought that the two cases should match.
The regparm(3) case should remap signals if and only if
the regparm(0) case remaps signals. Perhaps this
is not correct if the remapping is not needed for
native Linux apps; I doubt iBCS stuff would ever be
needing regparm(3) support.
Since you plan to delete the remapping cruft from
the regparm(0) case, then obviously it should not
be added to the regparm(3) case.
-
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]
