On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 10:32:42AM -0700, Jun Sun wrote: > > The primary problem is the differnet calling sequence for o32 and N64. > > As it looks we'll be able to use either the o32 function or the native > > syscall to implement all of the necessary N32 syscalls. > > For 64bit kernel, do we intend to have one syscall table that support o32, > n32 and n64 altogether? Or we will have multiple tables for them? Several approach to solve that problem. Adding another 1000 entries - which will cost 8000 bytes of memory that will be mostly zeros. Having wrappers for each function that do the appropriate argument and result convertion is another. etc. > > The question is if we want to reserve another 1000 entries in our already > > huge syscall table for N32 or if we got a better solution ... > > It seems n32 can be naturally implemented through n64 syscalls, although I am > sure there are some nasty details to work out. Unfortunately there are ... > Where can I find n32/n64 spec? mipsabi.org which is no longer online. Anyway, I don't think there is a formal published N32 spec. And this whole thread is about the syscall interface. That isn't part of any ABI spec. Ralf
