From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michal Simek Subject: Re: [RFC] Introduce __ARCH_WANT_SYS_SYSFS Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 23:16:25 +0200 Message-ID: <480FA729.3000406@seznam.cz> References: <87a5b0800804220513t75690ceao938a288596b5ad0c@mail.gmail.com> <200804221515.28075.arnd@arndb.de> Reply-To: monstr-9Vj9tDbzfuSlVyrhU4qvOw@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200804221515.28075.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Will Newton , Linux Kernel list , linux-arch-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, git-gjFFaj9aHVfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, microblaze-uclinux-rVRm/Wmeqae7NGdpmJTKYQ@public.gmane.org Hi Arnd and others, I would like to fix syscalls in Microblaze repo. Can you give me a hint how to do it? I look at Blackfin arch and I compared files with microblaze. There are some differences but not so much. Can you tell me how to test it which syscall is necessary for platform. I have never found any documentation about. In my syscall_table.S (on some arch in entry.S) is one big jump table with reference to syscalls. In unistd.h is definition. Is there any convention which syscalls are use for all archs and which are architecture specific? Thanks for info, Michal Simek >> This patch introduces a __ARCH_WANT_SYS_SYSFS #define for >> architectures that support the sysfs(2) system call. At the moment >> that's everybody but blackfin, but future architectures may want to >> save the (admittedly small) code size that it adds to the kernel as >> well. > > Yes, good thing to have. Since we'll be getting a new architecture > (microblaze) soon, I think we should extend this mechanism (even though > it's ugly) to all syscalls that we don't want to have in new architectures > and make sure that microblaze doesn't have to set any of them. > > Arnd <>< > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from service2.sh.cvut.cz ([147.32.127.218]:35885 "EHLO service2.sh.cvut.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751118AbYDWVPG (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:15:06 -0400 Message-ID: <480FA729.3000406@seznam.cz> Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 23:16:25 +0200 From: Michal Simek Reply-To: monstr@seznam.cz MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC] Introduce __ARCH_WANT_SYS_SYSFS References: <87a5b0800804220513t75690ceao938a288596b5ad0c@mail.gmail.com> <200804221515.28075.arnd@arndb.de> In-Reply-To: <200804221515.28075.arnd@arndb.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Will Newton , Linux Kernel list , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, git@xilinx.com, microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au Message-ID: <20080423211625.9uCKo8_IIwXaWXtZaRDgJER6O6m9jHpg8dddqazoQQs@z> Hi Arnd and others, I would like to fix syscalls in Microblaze repo. Can you give me a hint how to do it? I look at Blackfin arch and I compared files with microblaze. There are some differences but not so much. Can you tell me how to test it which syscall is necessary for platform. I have never found any documentation about. In my syscall_table.S (on some arch in entry.S) is one big jump table with reference to syscalls. In unistd.h is definition. Is there any convention which syscalls are use for all archs and which are architecture specific? Thanks for info, Michal Simek >> This patch introduces a __ARCH_WANT_SYS_SYSFS #define for >> architectures that support the sysfs(2) system call. At the moment >> that's everybody but blackfin, but future architectures may want to >> save the (admittedly small) code size that it adds to the kernel as >> well. > > Yes, good thing to have. Since we'll be getting a new architecture > (microblaze) soon, I think we should extend this mechanism (even though > it's ugly) to all syscalls that we don't want to have in new architectures > and make sure that microblaze doesn't have to set any of them. > > Arnd <>< >