Re: 64-bit syscall ABI issue

2007-06-04 Thread H. Peter Anvin
David Miller wrote: > From: "Joseph S. Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 20:56:57 + (UTC) > > [ added linux-arch which is a great place to discuss these > kinds of issues. ] > >> What should the kernel syscall ABI be in such cases (any case where the >> syscall implementat

Re: 64-bit syscall ABI issue

2007-06-04 Thread David Miller
From: "Joseph S. Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 20:56:57 + (UTC) [ added linux-arch which is a great place to discuss these kinds of issues. ] > What should the kernel syscall ABI be in such cases (any case where the > syscall implementations expect arguments narrower tha

64-bit syscall ABI issue

2007-06-04 Thread Joseph S. Myers
When arguments of types narrower than a register are passed to a C function in a register, the ABI typically requires that they be sign-extended or zero-extended to the full width of the register. The compiler, generating code for the called function, may presume that the registers have been p