xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] libattr 2.4.32 arm eabi system call calling convention

To: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libattr 2.4.32 arm eabi system call calling convention
From: Nathan Scott <nscott@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 13:55:53 +1100
Cc: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200612071807.55023.agruen@xxxxxxx>
Organization: Aconex
References: <20061130025459.GA23869@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20061130092853.GB1534@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200612071807.55023.agruen@xxxxxxx>
Reply-to: nscott@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 18:07 -0800, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Hello,

Hi Andreas,

> On Thursday 30 November 2006 01:28, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 03:54:59AM +0100, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> > > When building for EABI, a different system call calling convention is
> > > used where system calls are numbered starting from zero, not 0x900000
> > > as in the old ABI.  This was causing 'ls -al' with an ls binary that
> > > was built with xattr support to SIGILL.
> >
> > Please just rip out the direct syscalls.  The days glibc provices all
> > the xattr syscalls in sys/xattr.h, and libattr should just forward to
> > those.
> 
> Yes, makes sense these days. Thanks for paying attention, Christoph.
> 
> Tim, who from the SGI side is taking care of the acl and attr packages in the 
> xfs-cmds repository these days? Would you be doing this change, or are you 
> waiting for a patch?

Tim's on holiday atm.  I'll cook up a patch (I have another attr patch
from someone I need to get merged too), and get someone to check it in.

> PS. I hope we'll meet at linux.conf.au this January in Sydney, or in 
> Melbourne 
> some days later :-)

I'll see you there too (I'm looking forward to your LCA talk ;)

cheers.

-- 
Nathan


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>