On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 12:44:20PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > It's nice if you can do so, but I wouldn't suggest that you _have_ to. > I have to admit that I rarely bother actually wiring new system calls up > on anything but PowerPC to start with. > > The important thing is that you've _considered_ the other architectures, > and the 32/64 compatibility implications. As long as the API of your new > system call is sensible and takes that kind of thing into account, it > should be fine.
Ok. :) > Had you considered changing the API so that you don't need the > compatibility wrapper at all? Could you take an integer number of µS or > ms instead of a struct timespec? Not before now, but I followed the API specified into RFC 2783 who specifies struct timespec... Thanks for your suggestions! I'll send a new patch ASAP! Rodolfo -- GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Device Driver [EMAIL PROTECTED] Embedded Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX programming phone: +39 349 2432127 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
