Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Standardise on NR_syscalls rather than __NR_syscalls.

From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:33:43 +1100

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 <[email-masked]> 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.