[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 09:38:36 -0500
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Cc: Joakim Tjernlund <Joakim.Tjernlund@...inera.com>,
"ldv@...linux.org" <ldv@...linux.org>,
"mpe@...erman.id.au" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"libc-dev@...ts.llvm.org" <libc-dev@...ts.llvm.org>,
"musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux powerpc new system call instruction and ABI
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 06:42:40PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> Excerpts from Joakim Tjernlund's message of May 19, 2021 6:08 pm:
> > I always figured the ppc way was superior. It begs the question if not the other archs should
> > change instead?
>
> It is superior in some ways, not enough to be worth being different.
The PowerPC syscall ABI *requires* using cr0.3 for indicating errors,
you will have to do that whether you conflate the concepts of return
code and error indicator or not!
> Other archs are unlikely to change because it would be painful for
> not much benefit.
Other archs cannot easily change for much the same reason :-)
> New system calls just should be made to not return
> error numbers.
Which sometimes is a difficult / non-natural / clumsy thing to do.
Segher
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
