On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 05:36:49AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > So are there any deep objections to doing this rename in a single, quick, > pain-minimized fashion right at the end of the next merge window, when the > amount > of pending patches in various maintainer trees is at a cyclical minimum? We > can > also keep an is_compat_task() migratory define for one more cycle just in > case.
Again, what about sparc? There we have both 64bit and 32bit syscalls possible to issue from the same process *and* no indication which trap had been used; how do you implement is_compat_syscall() there? There's a TIF_32BIT, which is used by mmap() and friends, signal delivery, etc., but that's not a matter of which syscall flavour had been issued. Said that, arch/sparc doesn't use is_compat_task(); it's open-coded everywhere... -- 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/
