Hi Eugene, Arnd, On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 19:27, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 3:02 PM Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 10:47, Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl b/arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl > > > > > > +84 common lstat sys_newlstat compat_sys_newlstat > > > > +85 common readlink sys_readlink > > > > +86 common uselib sys_ni_syscall > > > > Why uselib is declared, contrary to all the skipped syscalls below, > > that were sys_ni_syscall previously? Only __NR_socketcall was explicitly > > undefined in arch/parisc/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h. > > Good catch, I didn't see that in my earlier review. I agree we want the > files to be identical to the version they replace, so the macros need to > be there for now. > > We may later decide to clean this up and remove all __NR_* that have > no entry point, but the conversion to the new table format needs to > otherwise be a nop. > > > > > +87 common swapon sys_swapon > > > > +88 common reboot sys_reboot > > > > +89 common mmap2 sys_mmap2 > > > > +90 common mmap sys_mmap > > > > +91 common munmap sys_munmap > > > > +92 common truncate sys_truncate compat_sys_truncate > > > > +93 common ftruncate sys_ftruncate compat_sys_ftruncate > > > > +94 common fchmod sys_fchmod > > > > +95 common fchown sys_fchown > > > > +96 common getpriority sys_getpriority > > > > +97 common setpriority sys_setpriority > > > > +98 common recv sys_recv > > > > +99 common statfs sys_statfs compat_sys_statfs > > > > +100 common fstatfs sys_fstatfs compat_sys_fstatfs > > > > +101 common stat64 sys_stat64 > > > > It is probably worth adding a comment here that syscall 102 was > > socketcall, in order to make reason for this jump in syscall numeration > > self-evident. > > +1 > > In general, I'd argue we want to keep all the nontrivial comments that > were present in either unistd.h or syscall_table.S. unistd_32.h, unistd_64.h, syscall_table_32.h, syscall_table_64.h and syscall_table_c32.h are generated files. unistd.h and syscall_table.S file include generated files. I had the support to keep the comments in the generated files. Eg:- from github https://github.com/frzkhn/system_call_table_generator/blob/5fe5fb5a3ad457b234e7600d8a4b61b2e3629acd/ia64/syscall.tbl#L105 But I got to know the generated file don't carry any license info and comment section. That's why I removed it from all architecture. I'm ok to keep this support for all architecture. Please feel free to comment here. > > > > > +103 common syslog sys_syslog > > > > +104 common setitimer sys_setitimer compat_sys_setitimer > > > > +105 common getitimer sys_getitimer compat_sys_getitimer > > > > +106 common capget sys_capget > > > > +107 common capset sys_capset > > > > > > +108 32 pread64 parisc_pread64 > > > > +108 64 pread64 sys_pread64 parisc_pread64 > > > > It would be probably nice to have some syntax that would allow avoid > > this duplication (as compat handler on 64 bit and native on 32 bit are > > the same). > > I think I would prefer to have the compat table be generated with the '32' > abi rather than the '64' abi, so we end up with > > 108 32 pread64 parisc_pread64 > parisc_pread64 > 108 64 pread64 sys_pread64 > > I think this makes more sense, in particular on the other architectures > that have different macro names in some cases. When we do this, > the entries could get compressed to > > 108 32 pread64 parisc_pread64 > 108 64 pread64 sys_pread64 > Sure. I can do this thing. The above one may be applicable for parisc not other architecture. So the scripts might be slightly different. If we keep a standard way, the script will be unique. So the only difference will be Makefile and .tbl files for all architecture; I think that is our one of the goal. > > > > +348 common pwritev2 sys_pwritev2 compat_sys_pwritev2 > > > > +349 common statx sys_statx > > > > +350 common io_pgetevents sys_io_pgetevents compat_sys_io_pgetevents > > > > \ No newline at end of file > > As others have commented several times, Firoz still needs to fix > the missing newline. Sure. I was wondering why the checkpatch script is not catching this one. Where ever I came across I fixed it. Thanks Firoz > > Firoz, please fix all the newlines before you repost any further > patches. > > Arnd
