On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 09:26:08AM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote: > > I'm wondering if just removing those lines I just quoted would be > > the right thing to do (after applying your patch). > > > > Removing these four lines may work but it will break the following: > > 209 output(1, "%s (%d) returned ENOSYS, marking as > inactive.\n", > 210 entry->name, call); > > 'call' will have the syscall (shm->syscall[childno].nr) number without > the offset which will simply print the wrong syscall number for mips and > ia64. You're right. I just fixed this up in git after removing those other lines yesterday. > I am not that familiar with the code yet to be able to tell whether the > 'search_syscall_table' or 'deactivate_syscall' functions need the offset > as well or not. They should be safe, as they use/return the number as index into the tables we constructed. But shout if something looks odd, and I'll look into it. Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe trinity" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
