MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <50A231EE.7050204@imgtec.com>
References: <1352281674-2186-1-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com>
	<1352281674-2186-15-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com>
	<201211071421.39523.arnd@arndb.de>
	<509CD1D1.3050105@imgtec.com>
	<50A231EE.7050204@imgtec.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:01:35 +0100
Message-ID: <CACM3HyFE-S2NM75qVS2Fhhm8YoP1jH4mS41aZ5B1gW2wo-Q99g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 14/31] ARC: syscall support
From: Jonas Bonn <jonas.bonn@gmail.com>
To: James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        tglx@linutronix.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1004
Lines: 28

On 13 November 2012 12:41, James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com> wrote:
> The uClibc patches I mentioned have been posted, see here:
>
> http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/uclibc/2012-November/047110.html
>
> Please do try them out and provide any feedback.
>

Hi James,

Many thanks for picking this up...

This is the third time around for trying to get this into uClibc as
Mark Salter also pushed a patch set which got about as much feedback
(almost none) on the list as mine did.  His patchset, like yours,
preferred the "old" syscalls when present.

...and that gets me around to the question:  why should the "old"
syscalls be preferred?  I'm specifically asking this here because I'm
curious what the kernel developers' take on this is.

Regards,
Jonas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/