On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Indan Zupancic [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, February 22, 2012 20:47, Will Drewry wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Ben Hutchings

quoted

I would have thought the way to make sure the architecture is always
checked is to pack it together with the syscall number.

I missed that suggestion, putting the syscall number and arch in one
data field would indeed make it harder to not check the arch.

Is there enough room?  On x86-64 at least, rax could conceivably be
extended to 64 bits some day.  Bit 30 is already spoken for by x32.

--Andy