From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:52104 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754526AbYBFLGT (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2008 06:06:19 -0500 Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 11:04:25 +0000 From: Russell King Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix timerfd breakage on avr32 Message-ID: <20080206110425.GB25012@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <200802050627.m156R9G9006417@imap1.linux-foundation.org> <20080205105454.2c0f8133@dhcp-252-066.norway.atmel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080205105454.2c0f8133@dhcp-252-066.norway.atmel.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Haavard Skinnemoen Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, davidel@xmailserver.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, mtk-manpages@gmx.net, tglx@linutronix.de On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:54:54AM +0100, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: > sys_timerfd() has been removed, but avr32 still references it from its > syscall table. > > Signed-off-by: Haavard Skinnemoen > --- > On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 22:27:28 -0800 > akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: > > > From: Davide Libenzi > > > > Wires up the new timerfd API to the x86 family. > > Just one thing... > > > diff -puN arch/x86/kernel/syscall_table_32.S~timerfd-v3-wire-the-new-timerfd-api-to-the-x86-family arch/x86/kernel/syscall_table_32.S > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/syscall_table_32.S~timerfd-v3-wire-the-new-timerfd-api-to-the-x86-family > > +++ a/arch/x86/kernel/syscall_table_32.S > > @@ -321,6 +321,8 @@ ENTRY(sys_call_table) > > .long sys_epoll_pwait > > .long sys_utimensat /* 320 */ > > .long sys_signalfd > > - .long sys_timerfd > > The next time you go and remove a system call, could you _please_ post > a HUGE warning to linux-arch? Or just do a quick grep and fix it up. Wasn't there a decision at a kernel summit that anything which adds new syscalls should have a test program included so that architecture maintainers can test the functionality on their architectures? I seem to remember that it came up because the merged timerfd was a pile of utter crap which didn't have a hope in hells chance of working. So... where is the new timerfd test program? -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: