From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753603AbbIKQdO (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Sep 2015 12:33:14 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f169.google.com ([209.85.214.169]:35481 "EHLO mail-ob0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753117AbbIKQdK (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Sep 2015 12:33:10 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2108882.tTxglVCXxY@wuerfel> References: <49726621.LPTnfQXYGz@wuerfel> <2108882.tTxglVCXxY@wuerfel> From: Andy Lutomirski Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:32:46 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Wire up 32-bit direct socket calls To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Heiko Carstens , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andy Lutomirski , X86 ML , Network Development , Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Alexander Larsson , Cosimo Cecchi , Dan Nicholson , libc-alpha , Rajalakshmi Srinivasaraghavan , Linux-Arch Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 3:14 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 11 September 2015 11:54:50 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> To make sure I don't miss any (it seems I missed recvmmsg and sendmmsg for >> the socketcall case, sigh), this is the list of ipc syscalls to implement? >> >> sys_msgget >> sys_msgctl >> sys_msgrcv >> sys_msgsnd >> sys_semget >> sys_semctl >> sys_semtimedop >> sys_shmget >> sys_shmctl >> sys_shmat >> sys_shmdt >> >> sys_semop() seems to be unneeded because it can be implemented using >> sys_semtimedop()? >> > > Yes, that list looks right. IPC also includes a set of six sys_mq_* > call, but I believe that everyone already has those as they are not > covered by sys_ipc. > > For y2038 compatibility, we will likely add a new variant of > semtimedop that takes a 64-bit timespec. While the argument passed > there is a relative time that will never need to be longer than 68 > years, we need to accommodate user space that defines timespec > in a sane way, and converting the argument in libc would be awkward. > I missed sys_ipc entirely. Ingo, Thomas, want to just wire those up, too? I can send a patch next week, but it'll be as trivial as the socket one. --Andy