Hi Mathieu, On 14.10.2018 18:46, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > Hi Michal, > > I notice the following commit went into 4.18: > > commit 54b0a2011dfcd2e3fe2c28062694fbbe3eb377a3 > Author: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu Jun 14 08:24:39 2018 +0200 > > microblaze: Add new syscalls io_pgetevents and rseq > > Wire up new syscalls io_pgetevents and rseq. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx> > > It adds the rseq system call to the microblaze syscall list, but > does not add the required hooks in the architecture code, nor does > it select HAVE_RSEQ. So effectively, even though sys_rseq is reserved > on microblaze, it currently always returns ENOSYS. > > Is your intent to simply reserve the system call number, or to > also get rseq to work on microblaze ? Yes. my indentation is allocate syscall numbers for all these new syscalls because it takes some time when new syscalls numbers are propagated to toolchain builds. I can't see a problem if ENOSYS is returned because it is proper reaction when syscall is not implemented. Thanks, Michal
