David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > The sys_ptrace boilerplate code (everything outside the big switch
> > > statement for the arch-specific requests) is shared by most
> > > architectures. This patch moves it to kernel/ptrace.c and le
[Just realized that my 0/20 description didn't go out, so here it is.
I'll wait a bit more before respinning the set with feedback.]
This is a refactored version of the lib/inflate.c I posted about a
year ago. It has a few end goals:
- clean up some really ugly code
- clean up atrocities like '#i
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 06:12:21AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 06:09:00AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > [Let's try again now that sys_ptrace returns long everywhere mainline..]
> >
> > The sys_ptrace boilerplate code (everything outside the big switch
> > statem
Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The sys_ptrace boilerplate code (everything outside the big switch
> > statement for the arch-specific requests) is shared by most
> > architectures. This patch moves it to kernel/ptrace.c and leaves the
> > arch-specific code as arch_ptrace.
Look
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 08:50:43AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > > But if it's a pointer why don't you declare them unsigned long then ?
> > > C defines the long as the integer the right size to store a p
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 06:12:21AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Umm, it might be a good idea to actually send the current patch instead
> of the old one. I really should write this text from scratch instead
> of copying it :)
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sign
Christoph Hellwig writes:
> > Some architectures have a too different ptrace so we have to exclude
> > them. They continue to keep their implementations. For sh64 I had to
> > add a sh64_ptrace wrapper because it does some initialization on the
> > first call. For um I removed an ifdefed SUBARC
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 08:50:43AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > But if it's a pointer why don't you declare them unsigned long then ?
> > C defines the long as the integer the right size to store a pointer.
> ^
> Is it C?
Yes, that's what I read
On Monday 31 October 2005 19:39, Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 11:24:27AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > Matt,
> >
> > My concern about this series of patches is that it will make it harder
> > to keep the kernel zlib in sync with the upstream zlib.
>
> This code is very long out
9 matches
Mail list logo
