From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SB3r0-0001Xn-7L for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:44:26 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2NCZT77026622; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:35:29 GMT Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 26101-06; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:35:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2NCZJIA026615 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:35:20 GMT Message-ID: <1332506121.9740.404.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Bruce Ashfield Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:35:21 +0000 In-Reply-To: <4F6B48F2.8000107@windriver.com> References: <2207E1AD-E06F-40D6-9FD7-1452805A4CF3@dominion.thruhere.net> <1332427771.9740.240.camel@ted> <7F144BE0-BBF4-4EE0-9A1E-A6842C846E00@dominion.thruhere.net> <4F6B48F2.8000107@windriver.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: Koen Kooi , Patches, the oe-core layer Subject: Re: Syscall backporting and linux-libc-headers X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:44:26 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 11:44 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On 12-03-22 11:12 AM, Koen Kooi wrote: > > > > Op 22 mrt. 2012, om 15:49 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > > > >> On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 13:22 +0100, Koen Kooi wrote: > >>> In my never ending quest to get consolekit/polkit/etc working properly > >>> I've found that CONFIG_AUDITSYSCALL is really usefull (it's usefull in > >>> other contexts as well, but that's outside the oe-core set of > >>> recipes). It has the following problem: > >>> > >>> config AUDITSYSCALL > >>> bool "Enable system-call auditing support" > >>> depends on AUDIT&& (X86 || PPC || S390 || IA64 || UML || > >>> SPARC64 || SUPERH) > >>> > >>> No MIPS or ARM support. There recently was a pull request from Al Viro > >>> to get at least ARM support into mainline, but I'm not sure what > >>> happened to that. Anyway, I backported the ARM patch to 3.0 and 3.2, > >>> but to make it usefull I'd need to patch linux-libc-headers and bump > >>> PR on virtual/libc. > >>> > >>> What's the OE-core position on backporting syscalls to > >>> linux-libc-headers? > >> > >> Why can't we just increase the linux-libc-headers version? > > Sorry for the slow reply, I missed the original and was wrapped > up in some debugging. > > > > > In this case that would be perfectly fine. And bump PR in virtual/libc of course :) > > I was just about to do this. Just a day or so ago, I noticed that > the version had lagged (again) and needed to be bumped. I'm all > for this as well, as long as there's a graceful fallback of ENOSYS > there's no real harm to older kernels. > > Richard: an to you on this one .. is it too late to do this for > the various stabilization points ? I'm a bit jittery on this. If I have the patch today and it doesn't break anything it might make it in... > >> Presumably > >> someone running a kernel without the patches won't see any issue, the > >> syscall just won't be present and software will fall back? > > > > Exactly > > +1 (I read this after typing my response). > > > > >> I think the big concern would be deviating from mainline as its not so > >> much a backport as a divergence at this point (and this is why we can't > >> just upgrade)? > > > > Speaking of divergence, what is the point of having linux-libc-headers-yocto_git.bb ? > > Very little. It was originally used to export exactly the headers > as were present in the yocto kernel tree, but Richard and I since > agreed that tgz based libc-headers where faster and good enough. > > We can move it to the yocto layers for use by anyone that really needs > this 1:1 mapping of kernel tree to headers in the system. > > And a second: .. is it too late to do this for stabilization points ? No, I'll take that one since its a removal on something that is unused. Cheers, Richard