On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 5:36 PM Geert Uytterhoeven [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:19 PM Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:01 PM Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:59 AM Michael Ellerman [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

 arch/m68k/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl     | 11 +++++++++++
 arch/mips/kernel/syscalls/syscall_o32.tbl | 11 +++++++++++
 arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl  | 12 ++++++++++++

I have some changes I'd like to make to our syscall table that will
clash with this.

I'll try and send them today.

Ok. Are those for 5.0 or 5.1? If they are intended for 5.0, it would be
nice for me to have a branch based on 5.0-rc1 that I can put
the other patches on top of.

There is also another change that I considered:

At the end of my series, we have a lot of entries like

245     32      clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime32
245     64      clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime
245     spu     clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime

which could be folded into

245     32      clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime32
245     spu64 clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime

if we just add another option to the ABI field. Any thoughts on
that?

So "spu64" would mean "spu + 64"?
That makes it more difficult to read, and to grep.
What about allowing multiple ABIs, separated by commas?
So that line would become:

    245     spu,64 clock_settime                   sys_clock_settime

I agree that would be a nice representation, but doing this would
again require changing the script, which then in turn clashes with
Firoz' patches to unify it under the scripts/ directory.

       Arnd