[PATCH] powerpc: Standardise on NR_syscalls rather than __NR_syscalls.
Benjamin Herrenschmidt
benh at kernel.crashing.org
Thu Nov 19 21:33:43 AEDT 2015
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 15:29 +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 11/19/2015 02:45 PM, Denis Kirjanov wrote:
> > On 11/19/15, Rashmica Gupta <rashmicy at 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 ?
Evolutionary remains. This is a whorthwhile and fairly simple cleanup.
Cheers,
Ben.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list