From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72A46C6FD1F for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2023 16:28:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9486A3CD4F4 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2023 17:28:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (in-6.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384) server-digest SHA384) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0EA33CACC1 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2023 17:28:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC3DB14002C8 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2023 17:28:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBE6F218FE; Tue, 14 Mar 2023 16:28:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1678811283; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Es0Suax/Z9kAMm5RX4ZsinZFNzObzEmBb3eJU5D1kAc=; b=HWoOAI7JhvjiGpfBO/yaJ/+twDgc/gcBxg+YOlLJc64hm6hCMvWgMNGouNlTGNlPzmxI/b KdcMSpR7Wd4vXn9Zl2zUswMZPqr4UaLDZdxk9tiJCARLABGigZeHypjGjXg+94HvpMHJvO uDSXHI2sa62I6mwpluvHp6ImWw5yCtU= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1678811283; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Es0Suax/Z9kAMm5RX4ZsinZFNzObzEmBb3eJU5D1kAc=; b=UGR2DWPGbUNV4Pvmf8TJsE1VAmLQoEcAvjccnBB3w3AzQqLkwVeKDuLAQ+uzRJFQghYVDu /QxQUFp52boZnXBQ== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A610A13A26; Tue, 14 Mar 2023 16:28:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id CUoKKJOgEGSrZAAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 14 Mar 2023 16:28:03 +0000 Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 17:29:23 +0100 From: Cyril Hrubis To: Wei Gao Message-ID: References: <20230215023438.11370-1-wegao@suse.com> <20230221013446.19399-1-wegao@suse.com> <20230221013446.19399-2-wegao@suse.com> <20230314134948.GA7345@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230314134948.GA7345@localhost> X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-6.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/2] rseq: Copy linux rseq test header files to ltp X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi! > > We actually does not need most of the code. The only thing that we use > > from the architecture specific headers is the RSEQ_SIG constant. So > > unless you actually plan to write tests that use the assembly code in > > these headers I would put just the RSEQ_SIG into the lapi/rseq.h instead. > > > > There is no point in adding complex code that is not going to the be > > used. > > > Yes, indeed, that's why i have made a patch v5 to ONLY work on x86_64 together with only function/macro to be > used. Try to make test case small but the size is still big. This system call has no easy/friendly end user inteface > . Now I'm confused, I do not see a v5 rseq patchset. Also there is no need to limit the test to x86_64 all that we need is a per architecture RSEQ_SIG definition. -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp