On Aug 30, 2016 1:58 PM, "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 12:53:53 -0700 > Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Egads! OK, I see why this is a mess. > > :-) > > > > > I guess we should be creating the metadata from the syscall tables > > instead of from the syscall definitions, but I guess that's currently > > a nasty per-arch mess. > > Yep. > I wonder: could more of it be dynamically allocated? I.e. statically generate metadata with args and name and whatever but without any nr. Then dynamically allocate the map from nr to metadata? > > > > Could we at least have an array of (arch, nr) instead of just an array > > of nrs in the metadata? > > I guess I'm not following you on what would be used for "arch". Whatever syscall_get_arch() would return for the syscall. For x86, for example, most syscalls have a compat nr and a non-compat nr. How does tracing currently handle that? --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
