Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 21:33:25 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: x32-abi@googlegroups.com, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, GCC Development <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
        GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: X32 psABI status
Message-ID: <20110213213325.7bcc1a59@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <4D584A49.80306@zytor.com>
References: <AANLkTikgfv+L9WS4s6n5mQcXWTzc6YMNUSsgBiAOmKbE@mail.gmail.com>
	<201102132110.29630.arnd@arndb.de>
	<AANLkTimZA1Npf0nJ8PF-2=8Oe2LXr_ShyBJNkf8Dn5S5@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D584A49.80306@zytor.com>
Face: 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
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 986
Lines: 20

> The actual idea is to use the i386 compat ABI for memory layout, but
> with a 64-bit register convention.  That means that system calls that
> don't make references to memory structures can simply use the 64-bit
> system calls, otherwise we're planning to reuse the i386 compat system
> calls, but invoke them via the syscall instruction (which requires a new
> system call table) and to pass 64-bit arguments in single registers.

Who actually needs this new extra API - whats the justification for
everyone having more crud dumping their kernels, more syscall paths
(which are one of the most security critical areas) and the like.

What are the benchmark numbers to justify this versus just using the
existing kernel interfaces ?

Alan
--
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/