[v4,5/6] parisc: wire up rseq system call

Message ID 1539337442-3676-6-git-send-email-firoz.khan@linaro.org
State New
Headers show
Series
  • parisc: system call table generation support
Related show

Commit Message

Firoz Khan Oct. 12, 2018, 9:44 a.m.
Wire up rseq system call requires an architecture specific
implementation as it not present now.

Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org>

---
 arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

-- 
1.9.1

Comments

Arnd Bergmann Oct. 12, 2018, 9:56 a.m. | #1
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote:
>

> Wire up rseq system call requires an architecture specific

> implementation as it not present now.

>

> Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org>


Didn't we conclude that this should be skipped?

       Arnd
Firoz Khan Oct. 12, 2018, 10:16 a.m. | #2
Hi Arnd,

On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 15:26, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>

> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote:

> >

> > Wire up rseq system call requires an architecture specific

> > implementation as it not present now.

> >

> > Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org>

>

> Didn't we conclude that this should be skipped?


Helge told "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 chose this option; I feel it looks clean
"# rseq requires an architecture specific implementation" in syscall.tbl
hopefully remind him to add rseq syscall implementation in this architecture.

Firoz

>

>        Arnd
Arnd Bergmann Oct. 12, 2018, 11:52 a.m. | #3
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 12:16 PM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote:
>

> Hi Arnd,

>

> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 15:26, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

> >

> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote:

> > >

> > > Wire up rseq system call requires an architecture specific

> > > implementation as it not present now.

> > >

> > > Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org>

> >

> > Didn't we conclude that this should be skipped?

>

> Helge told "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 chose this option; I feel it looks clean

> "# rseq requires an architecture specific implementation" in syscall.tbl

> hopefully remind him to add rseq syscall implementation in this architecture.

>


But he said he wants the warning instead.

     Arnd
Helge Deller Oct. 12, 2018, 8:23 p.m. | #4
On 12.10.2018 13:52, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 12:16 PM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote:

>>

>> Hi Arnd,

>>

>> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 15:26, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

>>>

>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Wire up rseq system call requires an architecture specific

>>>> implementation as it not present now.

>>>>

>>>> Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org>

>>>

>>> Didn't we conclude that this should be skipped?

>>

>> Helge told "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 chose this option; I feel it looks clean

>> "# rseq requires an architecture specific implementation" in syscall.tbl

>> hopefully remind him to add rseq syscall implementation in this architecture.

> 

> But he said he wants the warning instead.


Correct.
Firoz, please simply drop this patch completely.
That way one will see generated warnings about the missing rseq (which is what
we want).

Thanks,
Helge
Firoz Khan Oct. 13, 2018, 5:42 a.m. | #5
Hi Arnd, Helge,

On Sat, 13 Oct 2018 at 01:53, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote:
>

> On 12.10.2018 13:52, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 12:16 PM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote:

> >>

> >> Hi Arnd,

> >>

> >> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 15:26, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

> >>>

> >>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote:

> >>>>

> >>>> Wire up rseq system call requires an architecture specific

> >>>> implementation as it not present now.

> >>>>

> >>>> Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org>

> >>>

> >>> Didn't we conclude that this should be skipped?

> >>

> >> Helge told "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 chose this option; I feel it looks clean

> >> "# rseq requires an architecture specific implementation" in syscall.tbl

> >> hopefully remind him to add rseq syscall implementation in this architecture.

> >

> > But he said he wants the warning instead.

>

> Correct.

> Firoz, please simply drop this patch completely.

> That way one will see generated warnings about the missing rseq (which is what

> we want).


Sure. will do!

Firoz

>

> Thanks,

> Helge

Patch

diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
index 7c9f268..91317be 100644
--- a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
+++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
@@ -366,4 +366,6 @@ 
 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
+# rseq requires an architecture specific implementation
+351	common	rseq				sys_rseq