On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:24:45PM +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:41:10PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > I agree it would be nicer if it had a wrapper that took a pt_regs, even > > if it does nothing with it. > > > > We can't use SYSCALL_DEFINE0() due to the fault injection muck, we'd > > need a ksys_ni_syscall() for our traps.c logic, and adding this > > uniformly would involve some arch-specific rework for x86, too, so I > > decided it was not worth the effort. > > Couldn't you just open-code the "return -ENOSYS;" in traps.c? I guess so. I was just worried that debug logic might be added to the generic ni_syscall() in future, and wanted to avoid potential divergence. > Error injection has no reasonable stable ABI/API expectations, so that's not > a show-stopper either. If people are happy with using SYSCALL_DEFINE0() for ni_syscall, I'm happy to do that -- it's just that we'll need a fixup for x86 as that will change the symbol name. Thanks, Mark.
