On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Ralf Baechle wrote: > Right now the 64-bit kernel interfaces are still pretty much an ad-hoc > approach and can't be considered frozen. There is now some pressure to > come up with a stable 64-bit API asap. Well, they are not really used by anything, yet so they are far from being frozen. > As first think I want to get rid of all the historic crap we have in > our syscall tables for the 64-bit syscalls. Let's start here: [...] Definitely. > I probably missed a few. The primary purpose of this posting is to get a > discussion about the 64-bit syscall interface started. It's still not > cast into stone so we can modify it as we see fit. The entire syscall > interface is still open for changes, this includes all structures etc. > Along with a 64-bit ABI we'll also have to deciede about a N32 ABI. It would be nice if we could keep a single set of syscalls for both (n)64 and n32. The address crop for n32 may be handled the Alpha way. I will investigate the topic soon. -- + Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland + +--------------------------------------------------------------+ + e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available +
