On 11/19/2015 02:45 PM, Denis Kirjanov wrote: > On 11/19/15, Rashmica Gupta <rashm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Most architectures use NR_syscalls as the #define for the number of >> > syscalls. >> > >> > We use __NR_syscalls, and then define NR_syscalls as __NR_syscalls. >> > >> > __NR_syscalls is not used outside arch code, whereas NR_syscalls is. So as >> > NR_syscalls must be defined and __NR_syscalls does not, replace >> > __NR_syscalls >> > with NR_syscalls. > Hi, > > But what's wrong with the current code? Why do we need such change?
Yeah, just out of curiosity. Why we had both __NR_syscalls and NR_syscalls to begin with ? _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
