From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755515AbbDNPAq (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2015 11:00:46 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:34198 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753196AbbDNPAj (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2015 11:00:39 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 16:00:34 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Andreas Kraschitzer , Benedikt Huber , "Pinski, Andrew" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Pinski , Kumar Sankaran , "Dr. Philipp Tomsich" , Christoph Muellner Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/24] ILP32 for ARM64 Message-ID: <20150414150034.GF14546@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <3234795.e0Uq9k2nUp@wuerfel> <76000FE9-46E5-4883-9E4F-C65444FD406C@theobroma-systems.com> <2069111.6po5Xr33Dn@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2069111.6po5Xr33Dn@wuerfel> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 04:07:36PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > For completeness, there is yet another option, which would be to use the > exact system call table from arm64 and do all the emulation in user space > rather than the kernel. This would however be the least compatible with > existing source code, so you probably don't want to do that. It would be great if this worked but I think we looked at it before and it seems nice until you hit the futex stuff and robust lists (I don't fully remember the details). Some of the structures (siginfo) would no longer be POSIX compliant and some of them aren't only accessed via libc to be able to create shadow copies. -- Catalin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 16:00:34 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v4 00/24] ILP32 for ARM64 In-Reply-To: <2069111.6po5Xr33Dn@wuerfel> References: <3234795.e0Uq9k2nUp@wuerfel> <76000FE9-46E5-4883-9E4F-C65444FD406C@theobroma-systems.com> <2069111.6po5Xr33Dn@wuerfel> Message-ID: <20150414150034.GF14546@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 04:07:36PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > For completeness, there is yet another option, which would be to use the > exact system call table from arm64 and do all the emulation in user space > rather than the kernel. This would however be the least compatible with > existing source code, so you probably don't want to do that. It would be great if this worked but I think we looked at it before and it seems nice until you hit the futex stuff and robust lists (I don't fully remember the details). Some of the structures (siginfo) would no longer be POSIX compliant and some of them aren't only accessed via libc to be able to create shadow copies. -- Catalin