Re: [PATCH] Start of compat32.h (again)

[David S. Miller]

   From: David Mosberger <[e-mail]>
   Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 09:10:47 -0800

   You conveniently cut of the important part of my message:
   
   	Remember that most compatibility syscalls go straight to the
   	64-bit syscall handlers.  You're probably hosed anyhow if a
   	64-bit syscall returns, say, 0x1ffffffff, but on ia64 I'd
   	still rather play it safe and consistently have all
   	compatibility syscalls return a 64-bit sign-extended value
   	like all other syscall handlers ("least surprise" principle).

If the return path is different for the 32-bit syscalls,
which is the point I was talking about, then that code path
can sign extend, truncate, or whatever the upper 32-bits of
the return value.

You need to do things differently in the 32-bit return path anyways.

I didn't miss the content of your email at all David, quite the
opposite in fact.