Re: [PATCH] arch/tile: new multi-core architecture for Linux

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Chris Metcalf
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 - 6:54 am

On 5/24/2010 2:53 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

I looked at the diff of the set of syscalls you provide and the ones
we've been using.

Specific questions:

- How do you propose representing the architecture-specific syscalls? 
We have three "very special" syscalls that are negative numbers, which I
won't worry about, since they'll be out of the normal numbering
sequence.  But we also have a few others (cmpxchg_baddr, raise_fpe,
flush_cache) that we'll need a numbering location for.  I see that you
already have an empty block from 244 (today) to 1023; perhaps
architectures should just use 1023 on down?  I'll do this for now.

- You renamed __NR__llseek to __NR_llseek, which of course seems pretty
reasonable, but libc expects to see the former (both glibc and uclibc). 
Is it worth requiring non-standard libc code?  I may just add
__NR__llseek as an alias in my unistd.h for now.

- Are you planning to keep all the ifdef'ed syscalls going forward? 
Because honestly, I'd rather just enable __ARCH_WANT_SYSCALL_NO_AT,
etc., and use the kernel implementations, since otherwise I'll have to
go into both uclibc and glibc and add a bunch of extra Tilera-specific
code and then try to push that up to their community, when really I just
want to have the Tilera architecture userspace support be as generic as
possible.

The result seems positive overall; I'm certainly happy to dump, e.g.,
"nice" and "stime", since they have obvious userspace wrappers (and in
fact libc is already geared up to use them if available).  And a few
other syscalls in the Tile list aren't even implemented but were just
brought over from x86 "in case", like afs_syscall, putpmsg, and getpmsg,
so I'm happy to abandon them as well.  And "sysfs" is commented out of
uclibc, and not present in glibc, so no big loss there.  Other than that
I think the set of supported syscalls will only change by a couple --
and more importantly, from my point of view, Tilera gets to stay
automatically synced to any new syscalls added to Linux going forward. 
So this is good.

I assume that folks are committing to not changing any of the existing
numbers, ifdefs, etc. in asm-generic/unistd.h; if we're the only
architecture using it, no one might notice until we did. :-)

-- 
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com


--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] arch/tile: new multi-core architecture for Linux, Chris Metcalf, (Wed May 19, 10:43 pm)
Re: [PATCH] arch/tile: new multi-core architecture for Linux, Chris Metcalf, (Tue May 25, 6:54 am)
Re: [PATCH] arch/tile: new multi-core architecture for Linux, Thomas Gleixner, (Tue May 25, 1:12 pm)
Re: [PATCH] arch/tile: new multi-core architecture for Linux, Geert Uytterhoeven, (Thu May 27, 6:41 am)
[PATCH 4/8] arch/tile: core kernel/ code., Chris Metcalf, (Fri May 28, 8:10 pm)
[PATCH 5/8] arch/tile: the kernel/tile-desc_32.c file., Chris Metcalf, (Fri May 28, 8:11 pm)
[PATCH 6/8] arch/tile: the mm/ directory., Chris Metcalf, (Fri May 28, 8:13 pm)
[PATCH 7/8] arch/tile: lib/ directory., Chris Metcalf, (Fri May 28, 8:16 pm)
[PATCH 8/8] arch/tile: hypervisor console driver., Chris Metcalf, (Fri May 28, 8:17 pm)
Re: [PATCH 0/8] revised patch for arch/tile/ support, Chris Metcalf, (Fri May 28, 8:20 pm)
[PATCH 0/8] revised patch for arch/tile/ support, Chris Metcalf, (Fri May 28, 8:20 pm)
Re: [PATCH 0/8] revised patch for arch/tile/ support, Arnd Bergmann, (Sat May 29, 4:29 am)
Re: [PATCH 4/8] arch/tile: core kernel/ code., FUJITA Tomonori, (Sun May 30, 7:58 pm)
Re: [PATCH 0/8] revised patch for arch/tile/ support, Arnd Bergmann, (Thu Jun 3, 1:40 pm)
Re: [PATCH 0/8] revised patch for arch/tile/ support, Chris Metcalf, (Thu Jun 3, 2:48 pm)
Re: [PATCH 0/8] revised patch for arch/tile/ support, Chris Metcalf, (Fri Jun 4, 2:32 pm)
Re: [PATCH 0/8] revised patch for arch/tile/ support, Stephen Rothwell, (Sat Jun 5, 5:56 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/8] revised patch for arch/tile/ support, Chris Metcalf, (Sat Jun 5, 6:30 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/8] revised patch for arch/tile/ support, Stephen Rothwell, (Sat Jun 5, 7:10 am)