On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 15:29 +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:

On 11/19/2015 02:45 PM, Denis Kirjanov wrote:

quoted

On 11/19/15, Rashmica Gupta [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

Most architectures use NR_syscalls as the #define for the
number of
syscalls.

We use __NR_syscalls, and then define NR_syscalls as
__NR_syscalls.

__NR_syscalls is not used outside arch code, whereas
NR_syscalls is. So as
NR_syscalls must be defined and __NR_syscalls does not, replace
__NR_syscalls
with NR_syscalls.

Hi,

But what's wrong with the current code? Why do we need such change?

Yeah, just out of curiosity. Why we had both __NR_syscalls and
NR_syscalls to begin with ?

Evolutionary remains. This is a whorthwhile and fairly simple cleanup.

Cheers,
Ben.