From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: davidel@xmailserver.org, akpm@osdl.org, tony.luck@intel.com,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, janak@us.ibm.com, drepper@redhat.com,
dhowells@redhat.com, christoph@lameter.com
Subject: Re: new syscalls
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 16:00:48 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1137646848.30084.81.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060118.172639.15928930.davem@davemloft.net>
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 17:26 -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:17:20 -0800 (PST)
>
> > How sophisticated this has to be? And what's the expected ETA? The
> > epoll_pwait is really a wrapper around epoll_wait (that did not change at
> > all), so the test in this case should just make sure that the signal
> > behaviour is the one expected.
>
> Something along the lines of a smoke test is probably sufficient.
> The platform folks just want to make sure they wired up the
> syscall tables correctly, for the most part.
In the case of syscalls using TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK we want to make sure
the architecture maintainer got a little bit more right than that -- but
the sigmasking.c test case I posted earlier ought to be mostly
sufficient for testing that, if the arch also switches to the generic
sys_rt_sigsuspend().
--
dwmw2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-19 5:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-18 18:55 new syscalls Luck, Tony
2006-01-18 21:36 ` Andrew Morton
2006-01-18 21:48 ` Ulrich Drepper
2006-01-18 21:58 ` David S. Miller
2006-01-18 21:53 ` David Woodhouse
2006-01-18 21:58 ` David S. Miller
2006-01-20 10:04 ` Andi Kleen
2006-01-20 10:15 ` David S. Miller
2006-01-23 6:44 ` David Woodhouse
2006-01-23 9:58 ` Heiko Carstens
2006-01-19 1:17 ` Davide Libenzi
2006-01-19 1:26 ` David S. Miller
2006-01-19 5:00 ` David Woodhouse [this message]
2006-01-19 1:28 ` Andrew Morton
2006-01-19 21:48 ` Davide Libenzi
2006-01-20 0:13 ` Davide Libenzi
2006-01-20 0:23 ` Ulrich Drepper
2006-01-20 0:34 ` Davide Libenzi
2006-01-19 1:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-01-19 2:30 ` Andi Kleen
2006-01-19 13:50 ` JANAK DESAI
2006-01-22 17:45 ` JANAK DESAI
2006-01-24 23:44 ` JANAK DESAI
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-01-18 3:29 Andrew Morton
2006-01-18 3:38 ` Andi Kleen
2006-01-20 9:43 ` Heiko Carstens
2006-01-20 9:48 ` Andi Kleen
2006-01-20 9:49 ` David S. Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1137646848.30084.81.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=christoph@lameter.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=janak@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox