Am Mittwoch, den 17.07.2013, 15:19 +0200 schrieb Szabolcs Nagy:
> note that the problem is not that __VA_ARGS__ is empty
> (it's not, contrary to what i might implied), but that
> if n becomes 0 (== __VA_ARGS__ expands to one argument),
> then there is no more arguments in the __SYSCALL_NARGS_X
> call to substitute for '...', so a simple fix would be
> 
> #define __SYSCALL_NARGS(...) __SYSCALL_NARGS_X(__VA_ARGS__,7,6,5,4,3,2,1,0, tralala)

right, you always have the name of the syscall as first argument

> but i'm not sure if this should be fixed (this is internal
> code and i think there are no 0 argument syscalls)
> 
> i just wanted to record how i found the close without fd issue
> (which shows that some kind of type checking for syscall
> arguments would help libc hacking.. but that's non-trivial
> to do)

if there are really no 0 argument syscalls

#define __SYSCALL_NARGS(...) __SYSCALL_NARGS_X(__VA_ARGS__,7,6,5,4,3,2,1, tralali, tralala)

would be an implementation of a first consistency test. But wait my
man page of syscall(2) already has an example of a 0 argument one.

Other consistency checks would probably a bit more difficult to
implement. I could imagine how to check for the number of arguments of
particular syscalls. Type checking would be more difficult, and would
probably need some maintenance.

Jens

-- 
:: INRIA Nancy Grand Est :: http://www.loria.fr/~gustedt/   ::
:: AlGorille ::::::::::::::: office Nancy : +33 383593090   ::
:: ICube :::::::::::::: office Strasbourg : +33 368854536   ::
:: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: gsm France : +33 651400183   ::
:: :::::::::::::::::::: gsm international : +49 15737185122 ::