This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]


On 22/09/2016 17:34, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Adhemerval Zanella:
>> We can, at least for x86_64 for instance where it uses another indirection
>> for INTERNAL_SYSCALL.  However, something similar fails for i386, where
>> macro substitution for INTERNAL_SYSCALL will try string concatenation and
>> thus mess with intended behaviour.  Also, _SYSCALL_NARGS macro would be
>> required to be different to take in consideration the 'err' argument
>> required for INTERNAL syscall (something I noted I coded wrong).
>> I think calling the {INLINE,INTERNAL}_SYSCALL directly would be the safer 
>> and agnostic approach to avoid issues on how they are actually implemented 
>> by each port.
> Okay, it looks like this is the better way for now.
>> I tested the following patch with a build for practically all current
>> supported ports (aarch64, alpha, armeabi, armeaihf, hppa, ia64, i386, m68k,
>> microblaze, mips{32,64,n64}, nios2, powerpc{32,64,64le}, s390{-32,-64}, sh4,
>> sparc{64}, tile{pro,x64}, x86_64, and x32) and saw no build issues.  I also
>> checked on x86_64 and i386.  To actually check INTERNAL_SYSCALL_CALL macro
>> work I changed sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/pthread_setaffinity.c to use it.
> Did you see object code changes from that?

I haven't checked all of the, but at least x86_64, i386, aarch64, and powerpc64le
do not change.  I presume it is ok to push upstream, correct?

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]