lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 4/6] parisc: uapi header and system call table file generation
Hi Helge,

On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 15:57, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> On 11.10.2018 08:48, Firoz Khan wrote:
> > Hi Helge,
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 11:40, Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Helge,
> >>
> >> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 01:48, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> * Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org>:
> >>>> System call table generation script must be run to generate
> >>>> unistd_32/64.h and syscall_table_32/64/c32.h files. This patch
> >>>> will have changes which will invokes the script.
> >>>>
> >>>> This patch will generate unistd_32/64.h and syscall_table_
> >>>> 32/64/c32.h files by the syscall table generation script
> >>>> invoked by arch/parisc/Makefile and the generated files against
> >>>> the removed files will be identical.
> >>>>
> >>>> The generated uapi header file will be included in uapi/asm/
> >>>> unistd_32/64.h and generated system call table support file will
> >>>> be included by arch/sparc/kernel/syscall_table_32/64.S file.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> arch/parisc/Makefile | 4 +
> >>>> arch/parisc/include/asm/Kbuild | 3 +
> >>>> arch/parisc/include/uapi/asm/Kbuild | 2 +
> >>>> arch/parisc/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h | 373 +--------------------------
> >>>> arch/parisc/kernel/syscall.S | 12 +-
> >>>> arch/parisc/kernel/syscall_table.S | 459 ----------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Can we please get rid of those two new files:
> >>
> >> Yes, we don't need those files some of the architecture and other
> >> architecture does have same/similar files. That's why I added below
> >> files, so every architecture implementation looks same.
> >>
> >> I feel it is better to remove these files.
> >> Arnd, Do u have any comment on this?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Firoz
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> arch/parisc/kernel/syscall_table_32.S | 13 +
> >>>> arch/parisc/kernel/syscall_table_64.S | 20 ++
> >>>
> >>> Both are not needed (at least on parisc) if you apply the following
> >>> patch on top of your patch series.
> >>> This patch finally fixes the 64-bit kernel on parisc (tested on real
> >>> hardware).
> >>>
> >>> Helge
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscall.S b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscall.S
> >>> index 2523b83b88d8..45cddeeb968f 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscall.S
> >>> +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscall.S
> >>> @@ -923,10 +923,20 @@ ENTRY(lws_table)
> >>> END(lws_table)
> >>> /* End of lws table */
> >>>
> >>> -#include "syscall_table_32.S"
> >>> +#define __SYSCALL(nr, entry, nargs) ASM_ULONG_INSN entry
> >>> +
> >>> +ENTRY(sys_call_table)
> >>> +#if defined(CONFIG_64BIT)
> >>> +#include <asm/syscall_table_c32.h> /* compat syscalls */
> >>> +#else
> >>> +#include <asm/syscall_table_32.h> /* 32-bit native syscalls */
> >>> +#endif
> >>> +END(sys_call_table)
> >>> +
> >>> #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
> >>> -#define SYSCALL_TABLE_64BIT
> >>> -#include "syscall_table_64.S"
> >>> +ENTRY(sys_call_table64)
> >>> +#include <asm/syscall_table_64.h> /* 64-bit native syscalls */
> >>> +END(sys_call_table64)
> >>> #endif
> >>>
> >>> /*
> >
> > I could see a patch (commit 47514da3ac20150cdf764466fbc2010c0fca0163)
> > which will perform a compile-check when adding a new syscall. My patches
> > will remove this feature. Is that fine?
>
> Yes, removing that feature is OK.
> Since everything is then autogenerated I don't expect such bugs.

Sure, thanks for your reply.

Firoz

>
> Helge

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-11 17:01    [W:0.050 / U:2.124 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site