[LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/ustat: Move the syscall to lapi

[Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>]

Hi!
> >> > diff --git a/include/lapi/ustat.h b/include/lapi/ustat.h
> >> > index 12c073582..6365b2e92 100644
> >> > --- a/include/lapi/ustat.h
> >> > +++ b/include/lapi/ustat.h
> >> > @@ -10,12 +10,19 @@
> >> >  #ifdef HAVE_SYS_USTAT_H
> >> >  # include <sys/ustat.h>
> >>
> >> Just a thought, but this is potentially a problem if lib C implementes
> >> ustat in user land, but the system call still exists. Which I think is
> >> more likely with an obsolete system call.
> >
> > Good point. So it all depends on what we want to focus on, if we are
> > after kernel, we should call the syscall directly, if we look at system
> > functionality we should go after the libc one by default.
> >
> > I guess that ideally we should test both, not sure how to achiveve that
> > reasonably easily...
> 
> Possibly we could create a config option which forcibly sets (almost)
> all the HAVE_* macros to zero. This will probably result in a lot of
> tests being skipped as well, but it might be good enough.

I don't think that this will actully get past linking, I suppose we
would end up with two confilicting syscall wrappers in most of the
cases.

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz