> Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Yes, fine by me, but I think we should also state that any SWI made
> > *directly* from thumb code is handled "as if" it were done as SYS_syscall
> > (except that the immediate field of the thumb swi instruction is not used).
> 
> I would suggest checking it for some value - just to 'future proof'
> things.
> 
> I realise this means a counple of branches in the thumb swi case....
> 
> 	David
> 

No, I think that for now we should just mandate that the comment field be 
set to zero.  If in the future we want to extend on this we can allow some 
other values and pay the price then.

A pedantic kernel could check of course, but I don't really see the point.

R.