Hi Dave, On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 06:14:17PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: > The core framework for the prctl() syscall is unloved and looking > rather crusty these days. It also relies on defining ancillary > boilerplate macros for each prctl() in order to control conditional > compilation of the different prctl calls. We have better ways to > do this now, using Kconfig. > > This patch defines a new arch hook arch_syscall(). Architectures > that implemement arch-specific syscalls can now select > HAVE_ARCH_SYSCALL in their Kconfig and define this function > appropriately. > > The core prctl() implementation now matches option against the list > of common or legacy prctls, deferring to prctl_arch() if an > unrecognised option is encountered. > > (arch_prctl() would have been a nicer name, but it conflicts with the > pre-existing syscall of the same name on x86, particularly in the um > code.) > > No functional change. [...] > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/prctl.h b/include/uapi/linux/prctl.h > index af5f8c2..c911ff0 100644 > --- a/include/uapi/linux/prctl.h > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/prctl.h > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > /* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */ > -#ifndef _LINUX_PRCTL_H > -#define _LINUX_PRCTL_H > +#ifndef _UAPI_LINUX_PRCTL_H > +#define _UAPI_LINUX_PRCTL_H Is it safe to rename this #define, or is there a possibility that userspace could be using it for something and relying on it not changing? Other than that: Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> Will
