On Tue, 2009-11-17 at 13:52 +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 05:36:19PM +0530, Sachin Sant wrote: > > Today's next 20091117 build failed on s390 with > > > > arch/s390/kernel/compat_wrapper.S: Assembler messages: > > arch/s390/kernel/compat_wrapper.S:1871: Error: operand out of range (164 is not between 0 and 15) > > arch/s390/kernel/compat_wrapper.S:1871: Error: junk at end of line: `(%r15)' > > make[1]: *** [arch/s390/kernel/compat_wrapper.o] Error 1 > > > > The code in question was added by commit 9db3031ac785b068eb4636465eebb7b346c48dbb > > > > fanotify: sys_fanotify_mark declartion > > Hmm, the compat wrapper for sys_fanotify_mark is more broken (besides the > fact that it doesn't compile). > The same is true for sys_fanotify_init. > > I thought it was general consensus that new syscalls should be wired up only > on x86 and let arch maintainers wire them up on their architectures. > Besides that a simple C source needs to be delivered so it can be easily > tested on each architecture. > > Especially we want to avoid subtle sign extension bugs like we have them here. > Probably gone unnoticed if there wouldn't be a compile bug. I'll un-wire tonight or fix it if you tell me how. I guess my code was supposed to use l instead of or as in sys_fallocate_wrapper() instead of copying sys32_lookup_dcookie_wrapper(). Simple C source is available, but without s390 syscall definitions at people.redhat.com/~eparis/fanotify touch /tmp/tmp ./fanotify /tmp/tmp & ^Z echo hello > /tmp/tmp fg ^C -Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
