Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756038AbXIMIhb (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Sep 2007 04:37:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753327AbXIMIhX (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Sep 2007 04:37:23 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.188]:24578 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752870AbXIMIhW (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Sep 2007 04:37:22 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=My2Yzj+Sh3fNqmuCP8INoSPpjtpVPsrp3i6dFubCd7MdQvRixlRwgL6TEzPOZRnPUNfCqZ1TQtb57KnM4M0CIgyiu7Zczq1wcxjJf1gDPCaZQylbI+688WE5PYY/SHYZY06o2M8tZokVxrv0eDFnIhnJzNrj/mbk7ey0xe+fHeY= Message-ID: <8bd0f97a0709130137l55977c28w95cf8527ae8b9e24@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 04:37:18 -0400 From: "Mike Frysinger" To: "Matthew Wilcox" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Blackfin arch: add some missing syscall Cc: "Bryan Wu" , "Linux Kernel" , "Andrew Morton" , uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20070913081852.GC17367@parisc-linux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1189670203.30686.15.camel@roc-desktop> <20070913081852.GC17367@parisc-linux.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2020 Lines: 63 On 9/13/07, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 03:56:43PM +0800, Bryan Wu wrote: > > +/* Not relevant on no-mmu */ > > I thought this list seemed a little long, so I investigated a couple > of them. mbind makes sense (it's only implemented for NUMA ... a NUMA > embedded platform? not the kind which runs applications that use mbind), sorry, i dont quite follow ... you're saying it does or doesnt make sense to have NUMA syscalls on a no-mmu platform ? my [limited] understanding of NUMA is that it, by definition, requires a MMU in order to shunt pages around > but mremap doesn't -- there's even an implementation in mm/nommu.c. > Could you check the rest of these over to see if they truly don't need > to be implemented for no-mmu? you're right we want mremap, my fault > I think you'll want the *robust_list syscalls too. lack of man pages on these made be lazy and dump em into the mmu pile when in reality they have nothing to do with it ... we do want these > > +#define __IGNORE_swapon > > +#define __IGNORE_swapoff a no brainer -- not usable on no-mmu > > +#define __IGNORE_msync > > +#define __IGNORE_remap_file_pages > > +#define __IGNORE_mlock > > +#define __IGNORE_munlock > > +#define __IGNORE_mlockall > > +#define __IGNORE_munlockall > > +#define __IGNORE_mincore > > +#define __IGNORE_madvise implementation only exists for mmu > > +#define __IGNORE_mbind > > +#define __IGNORE_get_mempolicy > > +#define __IGNORE_set_mempolicy > > +#define __IGNORE_migrate_pages > > +#define __IGNORE_move_pages NUMA only > > +#define __IGNORE_mremap > > +#define __IGNORE_set_robust_list > > +#define __IGNORE_get_robust_list we want these > > +#define __IGNORE_getcpu useful only with SMP so i guess we should do it -mike - 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/