On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 10:25:30PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> > maintainers would have no idea that a new syscall has been added.
>>
>> If i386 has the new syscall, scripts/checksyscalls.sh will catch it and
>> inform us about it during our next kernel build.
>>
>> If you add it to x86_64 only, bad luck for anyone else ;-)
>
> Maybe we should change scripts/checksyscalls.sh to check the x86_64
> list of syscalls, and not i386?
>
> It's been a long time since "all the world's an i386" --- these days,
> it's "all the world's an x86_64". :-)
Let the kbuild people (and their employers) fight over it...
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
