From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f44.google.com (mail-wm1-f44.google.com [209.85.128.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADED938F64A for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2026 15:11:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.44 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776438690; cv=none; b=PzvQGCqZYiUgpH3drRp0wDpcINPqrviVYmCrBeCLJ+SjIW4pHUGFQ87w1ksna7nhj+zMa9B8NDqW6R0b83/PelpNXPZk2PAKk7Bl1sPLmDrdLJ6PjI39GQ0Nk23w8HFALj1ZSKbS1sSxl19w6roL7MkVpV8wBw7SRqNr2wv1LjU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776438690; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xxec1yHgJbPl8i5bLrRlB9bA5QiiLXD6oseWcH7kBdk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=D75SDNj6Sy8Yi6DCdBO1rGNEqPXc+1k7R8yWmbwZ79BQm7epC/OkRiyLCxF0Z7ABgE4QMAtNYdwd+8jCYc7gtRp2cCqQuO1+W/htBNkOQ0sUa+FDX7J2LDRrNIoJiH7az8v5gaBYZjVWUT86eQuM5JHjOxBELKQwxyujpZov6Q8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b=YvPrmU8Z; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.44 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="YvPrmU8Z" Received: by mail-wm1-f44.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-48896199cbaso8585295e9.1 for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2026 08:11:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1776438687; x=1777043487; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=gKQfwAZAy6UM0COAZ8ddWWHLIY/D6XGoxFUGJBdu8NE=; b=YvPrmU8Z8bNbPYNfgy+iMOwre+gGjTLzAEGFkdkKgeMpd0q6BDDsDgmTaUVGQF9znO o1iGGrOdthMZ06Tgev8NMO+ccbWRa0kkZt2D3l5hjMpmO19TkUOeBpHcKuKXCbfenN+v 4yD1ZQGFSQbngDj72BqF6cwTO6yUKKOUuF0jObnF2yTNAElP5Lq92DRulyLfSsYlPL7C ySgxfy2BhGz7CahL+ZHWMBrHXwqXTYiDqpfSNjg+wYeC3tDamAD34lU554clKYfiLBy2 d3/EZ/vpqxqJGRERE53Tkjn5tI1YAvtYC7Pu83lrZvHZyR55VP0tfpisFSGKDha7IcLz wCXA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1776438687; x=1777043487; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=gKQfwAZAy6UM0COAZ8ddWWHLIY/D6XGoxFUGJBdu8NE=; b=SyBv2Ntiuz00gT6REGmp8u8z5JzeAXOFwgGs3yboX5+20+Jv/dMrQv7SDiU/P1Iumr 9tOyb9Ci58ew/VBHI09aqHKbAeCF4pZV5A7x+K9rJCIBJykqQH4PwIihaWbhSu6Y+FpK a6OH6YqzBHh0bEJbSipqBQbxrYvMfxccdJrnmF8/MRGv5Z6F1xFJVJDH7TKV2c+MHP7/ fZ8qlI42TCm5msd/cOGbreKEnSShmKSLkwjj75Bs4sZjKHs8uFVes2UL0n22kwoeo0Pp Ov/M9y3GjJrs3nGi2Sggdh1mZV6iPlRjIQNkn0/tTO3xyguYfoJfIJQ8bCKe6fCjgdcX WNDg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AFNElJ802E9ATL8NvDaVnmcIQHynB7GwcROVrNZ/xChTDOybvx+4ksqmP3RQBnnPwbQ7OgLiaKR/d+I05y+gmHCfl7I=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyfossdjnxH86PUdYSIR4MszgV5CtbAsoWJlumuGs18lWjiSzj+ 75zhlFjOR8DS4hf+PI8Sn0qEEx1BsTBRaR6Ok6iXK/c4bXQDpdwWTnQszI2USRSXnsg= X-Gm-Gg: AeBDietcb71YD6PmIpc4penYNzs7KZGyV5aoZztNjCDibm7Vf8f/M99m/CVuUTKJ/aT pdQzjqhvOs1SRBYKNoUfqMeASMMT+K7wvqI7G72+r3HFib63NBp3CdcPdS1B4q9B24TJnx+hsMr +z8rn6qatKoFoP0PKB4TmpeDykMcYQc6yNKtyjnQDV88u4XbekqcQH7jIOOqveaFNu3JMdQ9u/T V/U5me9f4AG2y687W9qFQz75Q/1wtpf5Z0EZVMZTFyHMi2iAiA1bQm/p11DFWEbjVPF75WgTGsi twAqYt8Mc3uTlWxq13x6Mfah+3FJuO1bss5OcLgcvXaiqZFvIfErN8K+A0HKvSepdKOganh8G33 CF+xpOw5+dY2WFK5oVUNhb8pP6yEqdk8Q0VnWckljKhld3jfbo890fBpuW6FCpEYF4gielIEXEi xMFufao5RjDC5BclhQNPYCV+LqSb3oVplA9Ww5KlaXTFjNUKc= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:c090:b0:488:9e54:94c0 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-488fb74e130mr34312005e9.8.1776438687044; Fri, 17 Apr 2026 08:11:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pathway.suse.cz ([176.114.240.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-488fb794d2esm31681085e9.6.2026.04.17.08.11.25 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 17 Apr 2026 08:11:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2026 17:11:24 +0200 From: Petr Mladek To: Miroslav Benes Cc: Marcos Paulo de Souza , Josh Poimboeuf , Jiri Kosina , Joe Lawrence , Shuah Khan , live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] selftests: livepatch: Check for ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER config Message-ID: References: <20260413-lp-tests-old-fixes-v2-0-367c7cb5006f@suse.com> <20260413-lp-tests-old-fixes-v2-1-367c7cb5006f@suse.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed 2026-04-15 11:58:50, Miroslav Benes wrote: > On Mon, 13 Apr 2026, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote: > > > Older kernels that lack CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER config don't > > have any prefixes for their syscalls. The same applies to current > > powerpc and loongarch, covering all currently supported architectures > > that support livepatch. > > > > The other supported architectures have specific prefixes, so error out > > when a new architecture adds livepatch support with wrappes but didn't > > update the test to include it. > > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test_modules/test_klp_syscall.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test_modules/test_klp_syscall.c > > @@ -12,15 +12,26 @@ > > #include > > #include > > > > -#if defined(__x86_64__) > > +/* > > + * Before CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER was introduced there were no > > + * prefixes for system calls. > > + * Both ppc and loongarch does not set prefixes for their system calls either. > > + */ > > +#if !defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER) || defined(__powerpc__) || \ > > + defined(__loongarch__) > > +#define FN_PREFIX > > +#elif defined(__x86_64__) > > #define FN_PREFIX __x64_ > > #elif defined(__s390x__) > > #define FN_PREFIX __s390x_ > > #elif defined(__aarch64__) > > #define FN_PREFIX __arm64_ > > -#else > > -/* powerpc does not select ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER */ > > +#elif defined(__powerpc__) > > +#define FN_PREFIX > > +#elif defined(__loongarch__) > > #define FN_PREFIX > > +#else > > +#error "Missing syscall wrapper for the given architecture." > > #endif > > I know that Sashiko commented on that already but even with that I wonder > if it was cleaner to structure it differently... > > #if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER) > #if define(__x86_64__) > ... > #elif define(__powerpc__) > #define FN_PREFIX > #else > #error > #endif > #elif > #define FN_PREFIX > #endif Yeah, this looks better. Best Regards, Petr