On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 10:03 AM Brian Gerst wrote:>
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 2:40 AM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:23:13AM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
> > > Christoph Hellwig uncovered an issue with how we currently handle X32
> > > syscalls. Currently, we can only
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 2:40 AM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:23:13AM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
> > Christoph Hellwig uncovered an issue with how we currently handle X32
> > syscalls. Currently, we can only use COMPAT_SYS_DEFINEx() for X32
> > specific syscalls. These c
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:23:13AM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig uncovered an issue with how we currently handle X32
> syscalls. Currently, we can only use COMPAT_SYS_DEFINEx() for X32
> specific syscalls. These changes remove that restriction and allow
> native syscalls.
Did thi
Christoph Hellwig uncovered an issue with how we currently handle X32
syscalls. Currently, we can only use COMPAT_SYS_DEFINEx() for X32
specific syscalls. These changes remove that restriction and allow
native syscalls.
Brian Gerst (2):
x86/x32: Use __x64 prefix for X32 compat syscalls
x86/x
4 matches
Mail list logo