Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:54:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:54:49 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:3347 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:54:47 -0500 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:03:03 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: george anzinger cc: Jim Houston , Stephen Rothwell , LKML , , "David S. Miller" , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer (lets try again) In-Reply-To: <3DEF20E2.5AEE3E78@mvista.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1069 Lines: 27 On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, george anzinger wrote: > > I think this covers all the bases. It builds boots and > runs. I haven't tested nano_sleep to see if it does the > right thing yet... Well, it definitely doesn't, since at least this test is the wrong way around (as well as being against the coding style whitespace rules ;-p): + if ( ! current_thread_info()->restart_block.fun){ + return current_thread_info()->restart_block.fun(&parm); Also, I would suggest against having a NULL pointer, and instead just initializing it with a function that sets it to an error return (don't use ENOSYS, since the system call _does_ exist, and ENOSYS is what old kernels would return if you do it by hand by mistake. I'd suggest -EINTR, since that will "DoTheRightThing(tm)" if we somehow get confused). Linus - 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/