From owner-svn-src-user@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 2 17:54:07 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-user@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92FC06F8; Fri, 2 May 2014 17:54:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [IPv6:2001:470:1f11:75::1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68F4517B6; Fri, 2 May 2014 17:54:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ECDB3B924; Fri, 2 May 2014 13:54:05 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: Chagin Dmitry Subject: Re: svn commit: r265187 - in user/dchagin/lemul/sys: amd64/linux amd64/linux32 compat/linux i386/linux Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 09:20:16 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.4-CBSD-20140415; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; ) References: <201405011402.s41E2lnv074130@svn.freebsd.org> <844C08D2-4660-456A-9DCE-62A47A411688@bsdimp.com> <20140502044119.GA1354@dchagin.static.corbina.net> In-Reply-To: <20140502044119.GA1354@dchagin.static.corbina.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201405020920.16637.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Fri, 02 May 2014 13:54:06 -0400 (EDT) Cc: src-committers , Warner Losh , svn-src-user@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-src-user@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the experimental " user" src tree" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 May 2014 17:54:07 -0000 On Friday, May 02, 2014 12:41:19 am Chagin Dmitry wrote: > On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 04:13:09PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > > > > On May 1, 2014, at 10:26 AM, Chagin Dmitry wrote: > > > > > On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 09:17:45AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > > >> Re this and the signals changes: Are you sure that these values are identical on all linux ABIs? Last time I checked, there was substantial variation between arm, x86 and mips for these values. > > >> > > > > > > They are all different. I know. We emulate only x86, not arm or mips. So what the reason to case about this platform? > > > > The structure of the code is such that the other platforms can be added later. These changes make that harder than necessary when you could have move them to sys/x86 instead of making them fully MI. > > > > Anyway, just my humble feedback. I suspect we'll get demand to support linux/arm64 binaries about this time next year based on the trajectories of the arm64 roll out... > > > > yes, I ponder about something like sys/compat/linux/x86linux.h, thanks. I think I would prefer sys/x86/linux to mirror sys/amd64/linux32 and sys/i386/linux. You could put headers and/or .c files in that directory. -- John Baldwin