* missing syscalls
@ 2007-04-01 16:01 Sam Ravnborg
2007-04-01 19:15 ` Russell King
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2007-04-01 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arch
I have run the "missing syscalls" check for the cross compilers I
have available at the moment.
alpha: 38
arm: 8
mips: 3
sparc: 4
sparc64: 0
x86_64: 2
ia64: 10
i386: 0 (this is the reference anyway)
Result is pasted in below.
Sam
============== alpha ================
CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh
<stdin>:128:2: warning: #warning syscall creat not implemented
<stdin>:148:2: warning: #warning syscall time not implemented
<stdin>:176:2: warning: #warning syscall getpid not implemented
<stdin>:192:2: warning: #warning syscall getuid not implemented
<stdin>:204:2: warning: #warning syscall alarm not implemented
<stdin>:212:2: warning: #warning syscall pause not implemented
<stdin>:216:2: warning: #warning syscall utime not implemented
<stdin>:284:2: warning: #warning syscall getgid not implemented
<stdin>:292:2: warning: #warning syscall geteuid not implemented
<stdin>:296:2: warning: #warning syscall getegid not implemented
<stdin>:352:2: warning: #warning syscall getppid not implemented
<stdin>:688:2: warning: #warning syscall fdatasync not implemented
<stdin>:1220:2: warning: #warning syscall kexec_load not implemented
<stdin>:1260:2: warning: #warning syscall migrate_pages not implemented
<stdin>:1264:2: warning: #warning syscall openat not implemented
<stdin>:1268:2: warning: #warning syscall mkdirat not implemented
<stdin>:1272:2: warning: #warning syscall mknodat not implemented
<stdin>:1276:2: warning: #warning syscall fchownat not implemented
<stdin>:1280:2: warning: #warning syscall futimesat not implemented
<stdin>:1288:2: warning: #warning syscall unlinkat not implemented
<stdin>:1292:2: warning: #warning syscall renameat not implemented
<stdin>:1296:2: warning: #warning syscall linkat not implemented
<stdin>:1300:2: warning: #warning syscall symlinkat not implemented
<stdin>:1304:2: warning: #warning syscall readlinkat not implemented
<stdin>:1308:2: warning: #warning syscall fchmodat not implemented
<stdin>:1312:2: warning: #warning syscall faccessat not implemented
<stdin>:1316:2: warning: #warning syscall pselect6 not implemented
<stdin>:1320:2: warning: #warning syscall ppoll not implemented
<stdin>:1324:2: warning: #warning syscall unshare not implemented
<stdin>:1328:2: warning: #warning syscall set_robust_list not implemented
<stdin>:1332:2: warning: #warning syscall get_robust_list not implemented
<stdin>:1336:2: warning: #warning syscall splice not implemented
<stdin>:1340:2: warning: #warning syscall sync_file_range not implemented
<stdin>:1344:2: warning: #warning syscall tee not implemented
<stdin>:1348:2: warning: #warning syscall vmsplice not implemented
<stdin>:1352:2: warning: #warning syscall move_pages not implemented
<stdin>:1356:2: warning: #warning syscall getcpu not implemented
<stdin>:1360:2: warning: #warning syscall epoll_pwait not implemented
============== arm ================
CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh
<stdin>:1092:2: warning: #warning syscall fadvise64 not implemented
<stdin>:1176:2: warning: #warning syscall fadvise64_64 not implemented
<stdin>:1220:2: warning: #warning syscall kexec_load not implemented
<stdin>:1260:2: warning: #warning syscall migrate_pages not implemented
<stdin>:1316:2: warning: #warning syscall pselect6 not implemented
<stdin>:1320:2: warning: #warning syscall ppoll not implemented
<stdin>:1340:2: warning: #warning syscall sync_file_range not implemented
<stdin>:1360:2: warning: #warning syscall epoll_pwait not implemented
============== mips ================
CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh
<stdin>:424:2: warning: #warning syscall select not implemented
<stdin>:856:2: warning: #warning syscall vfork not implemented
<stdin>:1176:2: warning: #warning syscall fadvise64_64 not implemented
============== sparc ================
CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh
<stdin>:752:2: warning: #warning syscall setresuid not implemented
<stdin>:756:2: warning: #warning syscall getresuid not implemented
<stdin>:776:2: warning: #warning syscall setresgid not implemented
<stdin>:780:2: warning: #warning syscall getresgid not implemented
============== sparc64 ================
CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh
============== x86_64 ================
CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh
<stdin>:1356:2: warning: #warning syscall getcpu not implemented
<stdin>:1360:2: warning: #warning syscall epoll_pwait not implemented
============== ia64 ================
CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh
<stdin>:104:2: warning: #warning syscall fork not implemented
<stdin>:148:2: warning: #warning syscall time not implemented
<stdin>:204:2: warning: #warning syscall alarm not implemented
<stdin>:212:2: warning: #warning syscall pause not implemented
<stdin>:216:2: warning: #warning syscall utime not implemented
<stdin>:356:2: warning: #warning syscall getpgrp not implemented
<stdin>:856:2: warning: #warning syscall vfork not implemented
<stdin>:1316:2: warning: #warning syscall pselect6 not implemented
<stdin>:1320:2: warning: #warning syscall ppoll not implemented
<stdin>:1360:2: warning: #warning syscall epoll_pwait not implemented
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 16:01 missing syscalls Sam Ravnborg @ 2007-04-01 19:15 ` Russell King 2007-04-01 19:23 ` David Miller 2007-04-01 19:23 ` Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-01 20:54 ` Andi Kleen 2007-04-12 20:51 ` David Miller 2 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Russell King @ 2007-04-01 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sam Ravnborg; +Cc: linux-arch On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 06:01:23PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > ============== arm ================ > CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > <stdin>:1092:2: warning: #warning syscall fadvise64 not implemented and probably never will be. > <stdin>:1220:2: warning: #warning syscall kexec_load not implemented For the ARM kexec-using folk to decide. > <stdin>:1260:2: warning: #warning syscall migrate_pages not implemented Does this make sense for ARM? I've no idea. > <stdin>:1176:2: warning: #warning syscall fadvise64_64 not implemented > <stdin>:1340:2: warning: #warning syscall sync_file_range not implemented These two are replaced by a special ARM version which sane argument ordering. My patch for a previous version of the syscall check stuff shut these warnings up. > <stdin>:1316:2: warning: #warning syscall pselect6 not implemented > <stdin>:1320:2: warning: #warning syscall ppoll not implemented > <stdin>:1360:2: warning: #warning syscall epoll_pwait not implemented Maybe sometime in the future. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 19:15 ` Russell King @ 2007-04-01 19:23 ` David Miller 2007-04-01 20:09 ` Matthew Wilcox 2007-04-01 19:23 ` Sam Ravnborg 1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: David Miller @ 2007-04-01 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: rmk; +Cc: sam, linux-arch From: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk> Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 20:15:12 +0100 > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 06:01:23PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > ============== arm ================ > > CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > > <stdin>:1092:2: warning: #warning syscall fadvise64 not implemented > > and probably never will be. > > > <stdin>:1220:2: warning: #warning syscall kexec_load not implemented > > For the ARM kexec-using folk to decide. > > > <stdin>:1260:2: warning: #warning syscall migrate_pages not implemented > > Does this make sense for ARM? I've no idea. You should hook both of these syscalls up even if the config option that enables them usually is not, or cannot currently be, enabled. The cond_syscall()'s will make sure they always link properly and provide a -ENOSYS implementation. Hooking them up makes it easier to check future missed cases without us having to add a plethora of ifdefs to the missing syscall checks for each platform. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 19:23 ` David Miller @ 2007-04-01 20:09 ` Matthew Wilcox 2007-04-01 20:16 ` David Miller 2007-04-01 20:19 ` Sam Ravnborg 0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Matthew Wilcox @ 2007-04-01 20:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Miller; +Cc: rmk, sam, linux-arch On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 12:23:45PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > You should hook both of these syscalls up even if the config option > that enables them usually is not, or cannot currently be, enabled. > > The cond_syscall()'s will make sure they always link properly and > provide a -ENOSYS implementation. > > Hooking them up makes it easier to check future missed cases without > us having to add a plethora of ifdefs to the missing syscall checks > for each platform. I haven't looked at the missing syscall check implementation, but it seems like it's poorly designed if we have to add ifdefs for each arch. Why not allow arches a mechanism to state which syscalls they intentionally don't implement? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 20:09 ` Matthew Wilcox @ 2007-04-01 20:16 ` David Miller 2007-04-01 20:44 ` Matthew Wilcox 2007-04-01 20:19 ` Sam Ravnborg 1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: David Miller @ 2007-04-01 20:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: matthew; +Cc: rmk, sam, linux-arch From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 14:09:47 -0600 > I haven't looked at the missing syscall check implementation, but it seems > like it's poorly designed if we have to add ifdefs for each arch. Why not > allow arches a mechanism to state which syscalls they intentionally > don't implement? The whole idea is for the arch's to just find out that a new syscall exists when someone adds a new one and some tries a build on that platform the next time. If the arch's still have to do work then the whole exercise is pointless. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 20:16 ` David Miller @ 2007-04-01 20:44 ` Matthew Wilcox 0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Matthew Wilcox @ 2007-04-01 20:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Miller; +Cc: rmk, sam, linux-arch On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 01:16:19PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> > Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 14:09:47 -0600 > > > I haven't looked at the missing syscall check implementation, but it seems > > like it's poorly designed if we have to add ifdefs for each arch. Why not > > allow arches a mechanism to state which syscalls they intentionally > > don't implement? > > The whole idea is for the arch's to just find out that a new syscall > exists when someone adds a new one and some tries a build on that > platform the next time. If the arch's still have to do work then the > whole exercise is pointless. By and large, the missing syscalls are older ones, eg socketcall or utime, and they tend to be missing for good reason. I think it's entirely appropriate that the arch has to do work when a new syscall is added -- either implement it, or state that it's not supposed to be implemented. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 20:09 ` Matthew Wilcox 2007-04-01 20:16 ` David Miller @ 2007-04-01 20:19 ` Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-01 21:32 ` Russell King 2007-04-01 23:12 ` Arnd Bergmann 1 sibling, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2007-04-01 20:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthew Wilcox; +Cc: David Miller, rmk, linux-arch On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 02:09:47PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 12:23:45PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > > You should hook both of these syscalls up even if the config option > > that enables them usually is not, or cannot currently be, enabled. > > > > The cond_syscall()'s will make sure they always link properly and > > provide a -ENOSYS implementation. > > > > Hooking them up makes it easier to check future missed cases without > > us having to add a plethora of ifdefs to the missing syscall checks > > for each platform. > > I haven't looked at the missing syscall check implementation, but it seems > like it's poorly designed if we have to add ifdefs for each arch. Why not > allow arches a mechanism to state which syscalls they intentionally > don't implement? It's a stupid script so it is easy to fool. The following patch makes x86_64 shut up: diff --git a/include/asm-x86_64/unistd.h b/include/asm-x86_64/unistd.h index c5f596e..6f73918 100644 --- a/include/asm-x86_64/unistd.h +++ b/include/asm-x86_64/unistd.h @@ -620,6 +620,9 @@ __SYSCALL(__NR_vmsplice, sys_vmsplice) #define __NR_move_pages 279 __SYSCALL(__NR_move_pages, sys_move_pages) +#define __NR_getcpu /* 318 - not relevant */ +#define __NR_epoll_pwait /* 319 - not relevant */ + #define __NR_syscall_max __NR_move_pages #ifndef __NO_STUBS NOTE - I am NOT proposing this patch. It is purely an example how to in an arch specific fashion to shut up the syscall check. ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 20:19 ` Sam Ravnborg @ 2007-04-01 21:32 ` Russell King 2007-04-01 23:12 ` Arnd Bergmann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Russell King @ 2007-04-01 21:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sam Ravnborg; +Cc: Matthew Wilcox, David Miller, linux-arch On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 10:19:29PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 02:09:47PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 12:23:45PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > > > You should hook both of these syscalls up even if the config option > > > that enables them usually is not, or cannot currently be, enabled. > > > > > > The cond_syscall()'s will make sure they always link properly and > > > provide a -ENOSYS implementation. > > > > > > Hooking them up makes it easier to check future missed cases without > > > us having to add a plethora of ifdefs to the missing syscall checks > > > for each platform. > > > > I haven't looked at the missing syscall check implementation, but it seems > > like it's poorly designed if we have to add ifdefs for each arch. Why not > > allow arches a mechanism to state which syscalls they intentionally > > don't implement? > > It's a stupid script so it is easy to fool. > The following patch makes x86_64 shut up: > > diff --git a/include/asm-x86_64/unistd.h b/include/asm-x86_64/unistd.h > index c5f596e..6f73918 100644 > --- a/include/asm-x86_64/unistd.h > +++ b/include/asm-x86_64/unistd.h > @@ -620,6 +620,9 @@ __SYSCALL(__NR_vmsplice, sys_vmsplice) > #define __NR_move_pages 279 > __SYSCALL(__NR_move_pages, sys_move_pages) > > +#define __NR_getcpu /* 318 - not relevant */ > +#define __NR_epoll_pwait /* 319 - not relevant */ > + If a syscall is not relevant, define __IGNORE_getcpu etc instead. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 20:19 ` Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-01 21:32 ` Russell King @ 2007-04-01 23:12 ` Arnd Bergmann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2007-04-01 23:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sam Ravnborg; +Cc: Matthew Wilcox, David Miller, rmk, linux-arch On Sunday 01 April 2007 22:19:29 Sam Ravnborg wrote: > +#define __NR_getcpu /* 318 - not relevant */ > +#define __NR_epoll_pwait /* 319 - not relevant */ This looks like it is potentially harmful, since it breaks user space code that does things like int my_getcpy(void) { #ifdef __NR_getcpu return syscall(__NR_getcpu); #endif return -1; } Arnd <>< ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 19:15 ` Russell King 2007-04-01 19:23 ` David Miller @ 2007-04-01 19:23 ` Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-01 21:33 ` Russell King 1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2007-04-01 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arch On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 08:15:12PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 06:01:23PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > ============== arm ================ > > CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > > <stdin>:1092:2: warning: #warning syscall fadvise64 not implemented > > and probably never will be. > > > <stdin>:1220:2: warning: #warning syscall kexec_load not implemented > > For the ARM kexec-using folk to decide. > > > <stdin>:1260:2: warning: #warning syscall migrate_pages not implemented > > Does this make sense for ARM? I've no idea. > > > <stdin>:1176:2: warning: #warning syscall fadvise64_64 not implemented > > <stdin>:1340:2: warning: #warning syscall sync_file_range not implemented > > These two are replaced by a special ARM version which sane argument > ordering. My patch for a previous version of the syscall check stuff > shut these warnings up. Should they be ignored only for arm (and arm26?) or in general? Sam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 19:23 ` Sam Ravnborg @ 2007-04-01 21:33 ` Russell King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Russell King @ 2007-04-01 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sam Ravnborg; +Cc: linux-arch On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 09:23:55PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 08:15:12PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 06:01:23PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > > ============== arm ================ > > > CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > > > <stdin>:1092:2: warning: #warning syscall fadvise64 not implemented > > > > and probably never will be. > > > > > <stdin>:1220:2: warning: #warning syscall kexec_load not implemented > > > > For the ARM kexec-using folk to decide. Actually, this is the result of a typo, and should be fixed. > > > > > <stdin>:1260:2: warning: #warning syscall migrate_pages not implemented > > > > Does this make sense for ARM? I've no idea. > > > > > <stdin>:1176:2: warning: #warning syscall fadvise64_64 not implemented > > > <stdin>:1340:2: warning: #warning syscall sync_file_range not implemented > > > > These two are replaced by a special ARM version which sane argument > > ordering. My patch for a previous version of the syscall check stuff > > shut these warnings up. > Should they be ignored only for arm (and arm26?) or in general? for ARM only, as per my original patch. +#define __IGNORE_fadvise64_64 /* we provide our own - see above */ +#define __IGNORE_sync_file_range /* we provide our own - see above */ -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 16:01 missing syscalls Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-01 19:15 ` Russell King @ 2007-04-01 20:54 ` Andi Kleen 2007-04-01 21:10 ` Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-12 20:51 ` David Miller 2 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Andi Kleen @ 2007-04-01 20:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sam Ravnborg; +Cc: linux-arch > ============== x86_64 ================ > CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > <stdin>:1356:2: warning: #warning syscall getcpu not implemented It's implemented as a vsyscall. > <stdin>:1360:2: warning: #warning syscall epoll_pwait not implemented That one is missing. -Andi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 20:54 ` Andi Kleen @ 2007-04-01 21:10 ` Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-02 5:58 ` Andi Kleen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2007-04-01 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andi Kleen; +Cc: linux-arch On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 10:54:53PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > ============== x86_64 ================ > > CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > > <stdin>:1356:2: warning: #warning syscall getcpu not implemented > > It's implemented as a vsyscall. Can I assume you take care of silence the warning? A dummy entry in unistd will do the trick. Sam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 21:10 ` Sam Ravnborg @ 2007-04-02 5:58 ` Andi Kleen 2007-04-02 12:31 ` Matthew Wilcox 0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Andi Kleen @ 2007-04-02 5:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sam Ravnborg; +Cc: linux-arch On Sunday 01 April 2007 23:10, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 10:54:53PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > ============== x86_64 ================ > > > CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > > > <stdin>:1356:2: warning: #warning syscall getcpu not implemented > > > > It's implemented as a vsyscall. > > Can I assume you take care of silence the warning? > A dummy entry in unistd will do the trick. As Arnd points out that would break reasonable user space checks. -Andi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-02 5:58 ` Andi Kleen @ 2007-04-02 12:31 ` Matthew Wilcox 0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Matthew Wilcox @ 2007-04-02 12:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andi Kleen; +Cc: Sam Ravnborg, linux-arch On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 07:58:51AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Sunday 01 April 2007 23:10, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 10:54:53PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > > > ============== x86_64 ================ > > > > CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > > > > <stdin>:1356:2: warning: #warning syscall getcpu not implemented > > > > > > It's implemented as a vsyscall. > > > > Can I assume you take care of silence the warning? > > A dummy entry in unistd will do the trick. > > As Arnd points out that would break reasonable user space checks. Actually, this specific case would also be wrong -- you wouldn't want programs to return -1, you'd want them to call the vsyscall. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: missing syscalls 2007-04-01 16:01 missing syscalls Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-01 19:15 ` Russell King 2007-04-01 20:54 ` Andi Kleen @ 2007-04-12 20:51 ` David Miller 2 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: David Miller @ 2007-04-12 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: sam; +Cc: linux-arch From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 18:01:23 +0200 > ============== sparc ================ > CALL /home/sam/kernel/kbuild.git/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > <stdin>:752:2: warning: #warning syscall setresuid not implemented > <stdin>:756:2: warning: #warning syscall getresuid not implemented > <stdin>:776:2: warning: #warning syscall setresgid not implemented > <stdin>:780:2: warning: #warning syscall getresgid not implemented I figured out what was going on here. Sparc 32-bit only has the "setresuid32", "getresuid32" variants, it never had the plain ones and there is no value to adding those old versions into the syscall table. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-04-12 20:51 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2007-04-01 16:01 missing syscalls Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-01 19:15 ` Russell King 2007-04-01 19:23 ` David Miller 2007-04-01 20:09 ` Matthew Wilcox 2007-04-01 20:16 ` David Miller 2007-04-01 20:44 ` Matthew Wilcox 2007-04-01 20:19 ` Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-01 21:32 ` Russell King 2007-04-01 23:12 ` Arnd Bergmann 2007-04-01 19:23 ` Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-01 21:33 ` Russell King 2007-04-01 20:54 ` Andi Kleen 2007-04-01 21:10 ` Sam Ravnborg 2007-04-02 5:58 ` Andi Kleen 2007-04-02 12:31 ` Matthew Wilcox 2007-04-12 20:51 ` David Miller
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).