| Message ID | 1538975801-13735-6-git-send-email-firoz.khan@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | System call table generation support | expand |
On 08.10.2018 07:16, Firoz Khan wrote: > Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> > --- > arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > index 4e85293..4334bb7 100644 > --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > @@ -349,4 +349,5 @@ > 347 common preadv2 sys_preadv2 compat_sys_preadv2 > 348 common pwritev2 sys_pwritev2 compat_sys_pwritev2 > 349 common statx sys_statx > -350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > \ No newline at end of file > +350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > +351 common rseq sys_rseq compat_sys_rseq You can't add the rseq syscall for parisc yet. It needs additional code in the kernel for parisc which hasn't been tested yet. See my initial untested patch at https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10495209/ Helge
Hi Helge, On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 11:11, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote: > > On 08.10.2018 07:16, Firoz Khan wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> > > --- > > arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > > index 4e85293..4334bb7 100644 > > --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > > +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > > @@ -349,4 +349,5 @@ > > 347 common preadv2 sys_preadv2 compat_sys_preadv2 > > 348 common pwritev2 sys_pwritev2 compat_sys_pwritev2 > > 349 common statx sys_statx > > -350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > > \ No newline at end of file > > +350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > > +351 common rseq sys_rseq compat_sys_rseq > > You can't add the rseq syscall for parisc yet. > It needs additional code in the kernel for parisc which hasn't been tested yet. > See my initial untested patch at https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10495209/ Thanks for your update! When I compiled the kernel I got below warnings. <stdin>:696:2: warning: #warning syscall nfsservctl not implemented [-Wcpp] <stdin>:1335:2: warning: #warning syscall rseq not implemented [-Wcpp] I added an IGNORE entry nfsservctl in script/checksyscalls.sh because this syscall is gone. But we definitely have to keep rseq entry on parisc architecture. I can ignore this patch currently as your patch not yet tested. FYI, I have merged the system call table files based on our previous discussions. Please comment on that. I would appreciate if you can perform a boot test without this patch on the actual platform. Firoz > > Helge
On 08.10.2018 07:52, Firoz Khan wrote: > Hi Helge, > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 11:11, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote: >> >> On 08.10.2018 07:16, Firoz Khan wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 3 ++- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl >>> index 4e85293..4334bb7 100644 >>> --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl >>> +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl >>> @@ -349,4 +349,5 @@ >>> 347 common preadv2 sys_preadv2 compat_sys_preadv2 >>> 348 common pwritev2 sys_pwritev2 compat_sys_pwritev2 >>> 349 common statx sys_statx >>> -350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents >>> \ No newline at end of file >>> +350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents >>> +351 common rseq sys_rseq compat_sys_rseq >> >> You can't add the rseq syscall for parisc yet. >> It needs additional code in the kernel for parisc which hasn't been tested yet. >> See my initial untested patch at https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10495209/ > > Thanks for your update! > > When I compiled the kernel I got below warnings. > > <stdin>:696:2: warning: #warning syscall nfsservctl not implemented [-Wcpp] > <stdin>:1335:2: warning: #warning syscall rseq not implemented [-Wcpp] > > I added an IGNORE entry nfsservctl in script/checksyscalls.sh because this > syscall is gone. But we definitely have to keep rseq entry on parisc > architecture. I prefer to keep the warning for rseq for now. It reminds me that we still may want the rseq syscall. If the warning is a problem, you may simply add the __IGNORE_rseq define. > I can ignore this patch currently as your patch not yet tested. > > FYI, I have merged the system call table files based on our previous > discussions. > Please comment on that. I'll do after testing. Thanks! Helge > I would appreciate if you can perform a boot test without this patch > on the actual > platform. > > Firoz > >> >> Helge
Hi Helge, On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 11:36, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote: > > On 08.10.2018 07:52, Firoz Khan wrote: > > Hi Helge, > > > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 11:11, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote: > >> > >> On 08.10.2018 07:16, Firoz Khan wrote: > >>> Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> > >>> --- > >>> arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 3 ++- > >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > >>> index 4e85293..4334bb7 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > >>> +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > >>> @@ -349,4 +349,5 @@ > >>> 347 common preadv2 sys_preadv2 compat_sys_preadv2 > >>> 348 common pwritev2 sys_pwritev2 compat_sys_pwritev2 > >>> 349 common statx sys_statx > >>> -350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > >>> \ No newline at end of file > >>> +350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > >>> +351 common rseq sys_rseq compat_sys_rseq > >> > >> You can't add the rseq syscall for parisc yet. > >> It needs additional code in the kernel for parisc which hasn't been tested yet. > >> See my initial untested patch at https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10495209/ > > > > Thanks for your update! > > > > When I compiled the kernel I got below warnings. > > > > <stdin>:696:2: warning: #warning syscall nfsservctl not implemented [-Wcpp] > > <stdin>:1335:2: warning: #warning syscall rseq not implemented [-Wcpp] > > > > I added an IGNORE entry nfsservctl in script/checksyscalls.sh because this > > syscall is gone. But we definitely have to keep rseq entry on parisc > > architecture. > > I prefer to keep the warning for rseq for now. I'm fine with this. > It reminds me that we still may want the rseq syscall. > If the warning is a problem, you may simply add the __IGNORE_rseq define. But I still feel to keep an IGNORE entry, so once you test your patch; we can remove IGNORE entry and update the syscall.tbl. I would like you to take the call here :) Thanks Firoz > > > I can ignore this patch currently as your patch not yet tested. > > > > FYI, I have merged the system call table files based on our previous > > discussions. > > Please comment on that. > > I'll do after testing. > > Thanks! > Helge > > > I would appreciate if you can perform a boot test without this patch > > on the actual > > platform. > > > > Firoz > > > >> > >> Helge >
Hi Firoz, On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 8:49 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 11:36, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote: > > On 08.10.2018 07:52, Firoz Khan wrote: > > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 11:11, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote: > > >> On 08.10.2018 07:16, Firoz Khan wrote: > > >>> Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> > > >>> --- > > >>> arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 3 ++- > > >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > >>> > > >>> diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > > >>> index 4e85293..4334bb7 100644 > > >>> --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > > >>> +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > > >>> @@ -349,4 +349,5 @@ > > >>> 347 common preadv2 sys_preadv2 compat_sys_preadv2 > > >>> 348 common pwritev2 sys_pwritev2 compat_sys_pwritev2 > > >>> 349 common statx sys_statx > > >>> -350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > > >>> \ No newline at end of file > > >>> +350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > > >>> +351 common rseq sys_rseq compat_sys_rseq > > >> > > >> You can't add the rseq syscall for parisc yet. > > >> It needs additional code in the kernel for parisc which hasn't been tested yet. > > >> See my initial untested patch at https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10495209/ > > > > > > Thanks for your update! > > > > > > When I compiled the kernel I got below warnings. > > > > > > <stdin>:696:2: warning: #warning syscall nfsservctl not implemented [-Wcpp] > > > <stdin>:1335:2: warning: #warning syscall rseq not implemented [-Wcpp] > > > > > > I added an IGNORE entry nfsservctl in script/checksyscalls.sh because this > > > syscall is gone. But we definitely have to keep rseq entry on parisc > > > architecture. > > > > I prefer to keep the warning for rseq for now. > > I'm fine with this. > > > It reminds me that we still may want the rseq syscall. > > If the warning is a problem, you may simply add the __IGNORE_rseq define. > > But I still feel to keep an IGNORE entry, so once you test your patch; we can > remove IGNORE entry and update the syscall.tbl. If the warning is bogus (e.g. obsolete syscall), an IGNORE entry should be added. If the warning is due to a not-yet-implemented feature, IMHO it should not be silenced, as that would give the false impression that the feature is present and implemented. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
Hi Geert, On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:53, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > Hi Firoz, > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 8:49 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 11:36, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote: > > > On 08.10.2018 07:52, Firoz Khan wrote: > > > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 11:11, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote: > > > >> On 08.10.2018 07:16, Firoz Khan wrote: > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> > > > >>> --- > > > >>> arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 3 ++- > > > >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > >>> > > > >>> diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > > > >>> index 4e85293..4334bb7 100644 > > > >>> --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > > > >>> +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > > > >>> @@ -349,4 +349,5 @@ > > > >>> 347 common preadv2 sys_preadv2 compat_sys_preadv2 > > > >>> 348 common pwritev2 sys_pwritev2 compat_sys_pwritev2 > > > >>> 349 common statx sys_statx > > > >>> -350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > > > >>> \ No newline at end of file > > > >>> +350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > > > >>> +351 common rseq sys_rseq compat_sys_rseq > > > >> > > > >> You can't add the rseq syscall for parisc yet. > > > >> It needs additional code in the kernel for parisc which hasn't been tested yet. > > > >> See my initial untested patch at https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10495209/ > > > > > > > > Thanks for your update! > > > > > > > > When I compiled the kernel I got below warnings. > > > > > > > > <stdin>:696:2: warning: #warning syscall nfsservctl not implemented [-Wcpp] > > > > <stdin>:1335:2: warning: #warning syscall rseq not implemented [-Wcpp] > > > > > > > > I added an IGNORE entry nfsservctl in script/checksyscalls.sh because this > > > > syscall is gone. But we definitely have to keep rseq entry on parisc > > > > architecture. > > > > > > I prefer to keep the warning for rseq for now. > > > > I'm fine with this. > > > > > It reminds me that we still may want the rseq syscall. > > > If the warning is a problem, you may simply add the __IGNORE_rseq define. > > > > But I still feel to keep an IGNORE entry, so once you test your patch; we can > > remove IGNORE entry and update the syscall.tbl. > > If the warning is bogus (e.g. obsolete syscall), an IGNORE entry > should be added. nfsservctl look like an obsolete one, so I added an IGNORE entry in script/checksyscalls.h > If the warning is due to a not-yet-implemented feature, IMHO it should not be > silenced, as that would give the false impression that the feature is > present and > implemented. Helge had done some implementation for rseq but not tested. So we either add an IGNORE entry or leave the warning as it is. Thanks Firoz > > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert > > -- > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. > -- Linus Torvalds
Hi Firoz, On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 10:55 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:53, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 8:49 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 11:36, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > On 08.10.2018 07:52, Firoz Khan wrote: > > > > > <stdin>:696:2: warning: #warning syscall nfsservctl not implemented [-Wcpp] > > > > > <stdin>:1335:2: warning: #warning syscall rseq not implemented [-Wcpp] > > > > > > > > > > I added an IGNORE entry nfsservctl in script/checksyscalls.sh because this > > > > > syscall is gone. But we definitely have to keep rseq entry on parisc > > > > > architecture. > > > > > > > > I prefer to keep the warning for rseq for now. > > > > > > I'm fine with this. > > > > > > > It reminds me that we still may want the rseq syscall. > > > > If the warning is a problem, you may simply add the __IGNORE_rseq define. > > > > > > But I still feel to keep an IGNORE entry, so once you test your patch; we can > > > remove IGNORE entry and update the syscall.tbl. > > > > If the warning is bogus (e.g. obsolete syscall), an IGNORE entry > > should be added. > > nfsservctl look like an obsolete one, so I added an IGNORE entry in > script/checksyscalls.h Yes it is. > > If the warning is due to a not-yet-implemented feature, IMHO it should not be > > silenced, as that would give the false impression that the feature is > > present and > > implemented. > > Helge had done some implementation for rseq but not tested. So we > either add an IGNORE > entry or leave the warning as it is. Personally, I prefer keeping the warning, for the above reason. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 10:58 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 10:55 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:53, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 8:49 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > > If the warning is due to a not-yet-implemented feature, IMHO it should not be > > > silenced, as that would give the false impression that the feature is > > > present and > > > implemented. > > > > Helge had done some implementation for rseq but not tested. So we > > either add an IGNORE > > entry or leave the warning as it is. > > Personally, I prefer keeping the warning, for the above reason. Agreed, there is no need to patch this now if Helge is already working on the correct fix. Same for the other architectures. If there are architectures that have multiple missing syscalls, we could add a line with a comment for rseq but not actually define it, like 348 common pwritev2 sys_pwritev2 compat_sys_pwritev2 349 common statx sys_statx +350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents +# rseq requires an arch specific implementation +# 351 common rseq sys_rseq compat_sys_rseq */ +352 common open_tree sys_open_tree +353 common move_mount sys_move_mount +354 common fsopen sys_fsopen Arnd
diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl index 4e85293..4334bb7 100644 --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl @@ -349,4 +349,5 @@ 347 common preadv2 sys_preadv2 compat_sys_preadv2 348 common pwritev2 sys_pwritev2 compat_sys_pwritev2 349 common statx sys_statx -350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents \ No newline at end of file +350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents +351 common rseq sys_rseq compat_sys_rseq
Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> --- arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 1.9.1