From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932265AbbIBUQs (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2015 16:16:48 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:56186 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932102AbbIBUQq (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2015 16:16:46 -0400 Message-ID: <55E75913.5050605@zytor.com> Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2015 13:16:19 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Geert Uytterhoeven , Andy Lutomirski CC: X86 ML , Network Development , Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho , Andy Lutomirski , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Alexander Larsson , Cosimo Cecchi , Dan Nicholson , libc-alpha , Rajalakshmi Srinivasaraghavan , Linux-Arch Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Wire up 32-bit direct socket calls References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/02/2015 02:48 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > Should all other architectures follow suit? > Or should we follow the s390 approach: > It is up to the maintainer(s), largely dependent on how likely you are going to want to support this in your libc, but in general, socketcall is an abomination which there is no reason not to bypass. So follow suit unless you have a strong reason not to. -hpa