Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc:     X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com>,
        "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
Subject: Re: Cleaning up numbering for new x86 syscalls?
References: <CALCETrVPcgKarpTOsdTfODkNA76W04WvW+tNWoOx6+Em0KS04A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Nov 2018 10:03:30 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrVPcgKarpTOsdTfODkNA76W04WvW+tNWoOx6+Em0KS04A@mail.gmail.com>
        (Andy Lutomirski's message of "Mon, 19 Nov 2018 16:22:49 -0800")
Message-ID: <87efbggly5.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

* Andy Lutomirski:

> 5. Adjust the scripts so that we only have to wire up new syscalls
> once.  They'll have a nr above 1024, and they'll have the same nr on
> all x86 variants.

Is there a sufficiently sized gap on all other architectures as well?
The restriction to the x86 variants seems arbitrary to me.

Thanks,
Florian