On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 04:34:27PM -0700, Yu, Yu-cheng wrote: > On 8/25/2020 4:20 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > >On 8/25/20 2:04 PM, Yu, Yu-cheng wrote: > >>>>I think this is more arch-specific. Even if it becomes a new syscall, > >>>>we still need to pass the same parameters. > >>> > >>>Right, but without the copying in and out of memory. > >>> > >>Linux-api is already on the Cc list. Do we need to add more people to > >>get some agreements for the syscall? > >What kind of agreement are you looking for? I'd suggest just coding it > >up and posting the patches. Adding syscalls really is really pretty > >straightforward and isn't much code at all. > > > > Sure, I will do that. Alternatively, would a regular prctl() work here? arch_prctl() feels like a historical weirdness for x86 -- other arches all seem to be using regular prctl(), which allows for 4 args. I don't know the history behind the difference here. (Since prctl() and arch_prctl() use non-clashing command numbers, I had wondered whether it would be worth just merging the x86 calls in with the rest and making the two calls aliases. That's one for later, though...) Cheers ---Dave
