Re: [patch 05/35] reintroduce accept4

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org wrote:

quoted

From: Ulrich Drepper <redacted>

Introduce a new accept4() system call.  The addition of this system call

quoted

/* test_accept4.c

quoted

#ifdef __x86_64__
#define SYS_accept4 288
#elif __i386__

        ^^^^^^^^
	defined(__i386__)

quoted

#define USE_SOCKETCALL 1
#define SYS_ACCEPT4 18
#else
#error "Sorry -- don't know the syscall # on this architecture"
#endif

Anyway, it's just a test program. Succeeded on m68k using socketcall.

It _should_ work even without the 'defined()'. Didn't it?

Yes it worked.

Unknown symbols should expand to '0' in preprocessor value evaluation. Of 
course, the compiler may warn about the practice, but it shouldn't be 
technically wrong.

gcc 4.4 complains:
http://www.cyrius.com/journal/gcc/gcc-4.4-preprocessor-errors

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert-Td1EMuHUCqxL1ZNQvxDV9g@public.gmane.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html