lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/32] Blackfin update for 2.6.22-rc2
On 5/21/07, Robin Getz <rgetz@blackfin.uclinux.org> wrote:
> On Mon 21 May 2007 13:36, Mike Frysinger pondered:
> > On 5/21/07, Robin Getz <rgetz@blackfin.uclinux.org> wrote:
> > > since there is noMMU, are we better:
> > > - putting stubs (return ENOSYS - give runtime errors), or
> > > - just ignore the errors - and give compile errors? (Is there any way to
> > > put something into the syscall table, as not to get the warnings?)
> >
> > there are no compile errors ... having a stub that returns -ENOSYS is
> > the same thing as not having a stub as the fallback code when given an
> > unknown syscall # will return -ENOSYS ...
>
> So, is there a way to tell ./scripts/checksyscalls.sh that here is a list of
> syscalls that we can't do/have chosen not to implement - so we can live with
> the common fallback code, and not get the warnings?

we'd have to define some lists ... like an "obsolete" list where we
could say "do not warn about function XXX if function YYY is supplied"
... for example, we dont provide mmap() because we only use mmap2()
...

then we'd need a list for no-mmu where we could list ones that dont
make sense for us ...

to be sure, there are functions in that list we should be implementing
but no one has noticed/complained so it hasnt been an issue ;)
-mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-05-22 00:05    [W:0.085 / U:6.344 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site