Philip Blundell writes:
> The syscall number isn't in a register for the Linux/ARM syscall standard.
> With hindsight that was probably a mistake though we need to check it anyway
This 'mistake' only happened because someone decided to split the I and
D caches. It wasn't a mistake before that happened. Therefore, by
definition, it cannot be called a mistake at all, but a 'misdesign
of the ARM architecture' as a whole.
However, if you really think about it, not to put the syscall number in
the comment field would have been an even bigger mistake to have made
(since then you have to copy the user r1..r3,[sp],[sp,#4] to kernel
r0..r4,[sp], which would waste more cycles than reading the SWI instruction
and masking it.
_____
|_____| ------------------------------------------------- ---+---+-
| | Russell King [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ---
| | | | http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/~rmk/armlinux.html / / |
| +-+-+ --- -+-
/ | THE developer of ARM Linux |+| /|\
/ | | | --- |
+-+-+ ------------------------------------------------- /\\\ |
unsubscribe: body of `unsubscribe linux-arm' to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
