On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 02:22:41PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > If we do that let's do it consistantly for various old syscalls, not > > an odd one out. > > Yes, and it would be a good idea to do so, rather than hiding all these > compatibility calls in all kind of random places. > > There is, however, a reason *not* to do it which should be carefully > considered: by co-locating the compatibility version with the modern > version, it gets access to static functions that are part of the > implementation of the modern version. If we move the compatibility > versions out, it may entail having to export those statics. So we don't move such ones... I agree that it's a separate patch queue, BTW. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
