在2025年1月4日一月 下午3:07，Arnd Bergmann写道： [...] Hi Arnd, Thanks for your comments! > > I think for consistency with other architectures, we want start/length/flags > instead of start/end/flags. > > The meaning of the third argument is rather inconsistent between > architectures already, but at least the second argument is always > length so far. So this is actually designed to be aligned with RISC-V's semantics, and thus all arguments are aligned with RISC-V. IMO RISC-V's semantics is a better design that we should take, as I replied to Jinyang above. > > >>> diff --git a/scripts/syscall.tbl b/scripts/syscall.tbl >>> index ebbdb3c42e9f74613b003014c0baf44c842bb756..723fe859956809f26d6ec50ad7812933531ef687 100644 >>> --- a/scripts/syscall.tbl >>> +++ b/scripts/syscall.tbl >>> @@ -298,6 +298,8 @@ >>> 244 csky set_thread_area sys_set_thread_area >>> 245 csky cacheflush sys_cacheflush >>> >>> +259 loongarch loongarch_flush_icache sys_loongarch_flush_icache >> >> Can we use cacheflush as arc, csky and nios2? > > Agreed. I would also use the number 244 instead of 259 here. 259 is also selected to be aligned with RISC-V. Thanks > > Arnd -- - Jiaxun
