From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25187 invoked by alias); 23 Jan 2006 16:03:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 25177 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Jan 2006 16:03:20 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:03:18 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1F149w-0004dA-OA; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 11:03:12 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:03:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Richard Earnshaw Cc: Shaun Jackman , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: sim/arm RedBoot meminfo syscall [PATCH] Message-ID: <20060123160312.GA17767@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Earnshaw , Shaun Jackman , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <7f45d9390512141040m6d43725ag@mail.gmail.com> <20060123020134.GL27224@nevyn.them.org> <1138031768.1864.107.camel@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1138031768.1864.107.camel@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00328.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 03:56:27PM +0000, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 02:01, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:40:28AM -0700, Shaun Jackman wrote: > > > This patch implements the RedBoot meminfo syscall. In addition, rather > > > than ignoring unhandled syscalls, it sets errno to ENOSYS and returns > > > -1. This makes it possible to run "Hello, world!" compiled using > > > newlib and a RedBoot libgloss. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Shaun > > > > > > 2005-12-14 Shaun Jackman > > > > > > * sim/arm/armos.c (ARMul_OSHandleSWI): Handle the RedBoot system > > > call meminfo. Return ENOSYS for unhandled RedBoot syscalls. > > > > This looks totally plausible to me but I don't know much about it; > > Richard, any opinion on it before I approve it? > I've no objections. The SWI code has already been grabbed, so it > doesn't really extend the interface any further. > > As a general principle, however, I'd be against adding more 'top-level' > swi codes without cleaning up the interface to this module so that you > can carefully select from the command line the set of SWIs in force. Makes sense. Shaun, your patch is OK to commit. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery