On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:01 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:59 AM Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> > > arch/m68k/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 11 +++++++++++
> > > arch/mips/kernel/syscalls/syscall_o32.tbl | 11 +++++++++++
> > > arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 12 ++++++++++++
> >
> > I have some changes I'd like to make to our syscall table that will
> > clash with this.
> >
> > I'll try and send them today.
>
> Ok. Are those for 5.0 or 5.1? If they are intended for 5.0, it would be
> nice for me to have a branch based on 5.0-rc1 that I can put
> the other patches on top of.
There is also another change that I considered:
At the end of my series, we have a lot of entries like
245 32 clock_settime sys_clock_settime32
245 64 clock_settime sys_clock_settime
245 spu clock_settime sys_clock_settime
which could be folded into
245 32 clock_settime sys_clock_settime32
245 spu64 clock_settime sys_clock_settime
if we just add another option to the ABI field. Any thoughts on
that?
Arnd
