From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1M6Ncf-0001uS-T9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 May 2009 07:36:41 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1M6Ncf-0001rx-0h
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 May 2009 07:36:41 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60508 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M6Nce-0001rT-Ip
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 May 2009 07:36:40 -0400
Received: from naru.obs2.net ([84.20.150.76]:47177)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <nchip@kos.to>) id 1M6Ncd-0005oX-MB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 May 2009 07:36:40 -0400
Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 14:36:35 +0300
From: Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH ] linux-user: add tee systemcall support
Message-ID: <20090519113635.GA11400@kos.to>
References: <1242478961.2167.7.camel@system> <1242720723.2188.13.camel@system>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1242720723.2188.13.camel@system>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: vibi sreenivasan <vibi_sreenivasan@cms.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 01:42:03PM +0530, vibi sreenivasan wrote:
> hi all,

> >Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH ] linux-user: add tee systemcall support

> Is there any thing wrong with this patch. Please give some feedback
> So if there is anything wrong i will be able to correct it.

The implementation of tee appears fine. However, the tee testcases
I found all also used splice. What did you use to test this, or do
you plan to implement splice too?

> 
> Thanks & Regards
> vibi sreenivasan
> 
> >Signed-off-by: vibi <vibi_sreenivasan@cms.com>
> >---
> >linux-user/syscall.c |    8 ++++++++
> >1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> >diff --git a/linux-user/syscall.c b/linux-user/syscall.c
> >index 76f0c95..f2f87c3 100644
> >--- a/linux-user/syscall.c
> >+++ b/linux-user/syscall.c
> >@@ -6580,6 +6580,14 @@ abi_long do_syscall(void *cpu_env, int num,
> >abi_long arg1,
>          break;
> >#endif
>  
> >+#ifdef TARGET_NR_tee
> >+    case TARGET_NR_tee:
> >+        {
> >+            ret = get_errno(tee(arg1,arg2,arg3,arg4));
> >+        }
> >+        break;
> >+#endif
> >+
> >     default:
> >     unimplemented:
> >         gemu_log("qemu: Unsupported syscall: %d\n", num);
> 
> 
> 
>