On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 09:22:10AM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 11:41:56PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > However I'll try to write an addon patch to your patch series. Maybe we can > > > still get rid of compat_wrapper.c in a way which makes both of us happy. > > > Also.. the idea with the alias names for compat wrappers does seem to have > > > the disadvantage that it will pollute /proc/kallsyms for example. > > > > > > Anyway, I'm not sure if I will be able to come up with something this week > > > though. > > > > Great, I'm looking forward... > > Hi Yuri, > > after playing around with this a bit I couldn't come up with a solution > that I'm happy with, unfortunately. > > So in order to make some progress here I'd vote that we simply move the > existing compat_wrapper.c from arch/s390 to common code like you did in > your first approach and leave the existing SYSCALL macros alone. > > That will have hardly any effect to anybody else and your problem is > solved while s390 still works. > > Does that make sense? > OK. This week I'll split v1 as I did with v2, and send it here. So we'll have two versions, and so will start true elections. :) > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- 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
