Raphaël Rigo wrote:
Raphaël Rigo wrote:
Fabrice Bellard wrote:
Another point is that doing:
+target_long args[6];
+
+tputl(args, arg1);
+tputl(args+1, arg2);
+tputl(args+2, arg3);
+tputl(args+3, arg4);
+tputl(args+4, arg5);
+tputl(args+5, arg6);
at the start of e
Raphaël Rigo wrote:
> Fabrice Bellard wrote:
>> Another point is that doing:
>>
>> +target_long args[6];
>> +
>> +tputl(args, arg1);
>> +tputl(args+1, arg2);
>> +tputl(args+2, arg3);
>> +tputl(args+3, arg4);
>> +tputl(args+4, arg5);
>> +tputl(args+5, arg6);
>>
>> at the
Fabrice Bellard wrote:
Another point is that doing:
+target_long args[6];
+
+tputl(args, arg1);
+tputl(args+1, arg2);
+tputl(args+2, arg3);
+tputl(args+3, arg4);
+tputl(args+4, arg5);
+tputl(args+5, arg6);
at the start of every syscall is not acceptable. You should a
Raphaël Rigo wrote:
> Fabrice Bellard wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is it really needed to duplicate socket.h ? What are the differences for
> > mips ?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Fabrice.
> >
> Hi,
> almost all socket related constants are different on MIPS. I thought it would
> be
> cleaner to define
Fabrice Bellard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is it really needed to duplicate socket.h ? What are the differences for
> mips ?
>
> Regards,
>
> Fabrice.
>
Hi,
almost all socket related constants are different on MIPS. I thought it would be
cleaner to define all constants for each target, so that if we add
Another point is that doing:
+target_long args[6];
+
+tputl(args, arg1);
+tputl(args+1, arg2);
+tputl(args+2, arg3);
+tputl(args+3, arg4);
+tputl(args+4, arg5);
+tputl(args+5, arg6);
at the start of every syscall is not acceptable. You should add a
specific socket ca
Hi,
Is it really needed to duplicate socket.h ? What are the differences for
mips ?
Regards,
Fabrice.
Raphaël Rigo wrote:
Hello,
this patch is a revamped version of the one I posted about 2 months ago,
it is much better. It implements the syscalls related to sockets on the
MIPS platform (be
