From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/5159 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Szabolcs Nagy Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: [UGLY PATCH] Support for no-legacy-syscalls archs Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 11:52:57 +0200 Message-ID: <20140525095257.GI12324@port70.net> References: <20140525054237.GA18085@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1401011598 23396 80.91.229.3 (25 May 2014 09:53:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 09:53:18 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-5164-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun May 25 11:53:12 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WoV79-0007td-1x for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 25 May 2014 11:53:11 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 28144 invoked by uid 550); 25 May 2014 09:53:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 28135 invoked from network); 25 May 2014 09:53:09 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140525054237.GA18085@brightrain.aerifal.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:5159 Archived-At: * Rich Felker [2014-05-25 01:42:37 -0400]: > Here's a proposed next phase for supporting no-legacy-syscall archs > (aarch64 and or1k, among others). It's not complete but I think it > covers most of the important syscalls for standard functionality (not > linux-specific stuff tho). Some of them might be missing some error > cases or otherwise buggy so I'm sending the patch for review before > committing. ... > +#ifdef SYS_poll > __syscall(SYS_poll, pfd, 3, 0); > +#else > + __syscall(SYS_ppoll, pfd, 3, 0, 0, _NSIG/8); > +#endif cant it be done the other way around so new syscalls are tried and then the classic ones are just fallbacks? and what will happen with SYS_open?