[PATCH v2 2/2] Use direct socket syscalls for new kernels on sparc

[Joseph Myers]

On Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Aurelien Jarno wrote:

> On 2016-03-02 14:52, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Mar 2016, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > 
> > > Direct socket syscalls have been added in kernel 4.4 on sparc for
> > > bind, listen and setsockopt. Other direct socket syscalls were present
> > > before kernel 3.2 and are listed directly in syscalls.list, so there is
> > > no need to add them there.
> > 
> > Listed directly in syscalls.list for sparc64.  Don't they need __ASSUME_* 
> > adding for sparc32?
> 
> Yes, I think they need that. I looked at the exact list, and it seems
> that the send syscall is not provided on sparc. Does it means we should
> also define __ASSUME_SENDTO_FOR_SEND_SYSCALL and remove it from
> syscalls.list?

If the non-socketcall way of implementing a socket function on a given 
architecture involves use of a different syscall, then the appropriate one 
of __ASSUME_ACCEPT4_FOR_ACCEPT_SYSCALL, __ASSUME_SENDTO_FOR_SEND_SYSCALL, 
__ASSUME_RECVFROM_FOR_RECV_SYSCALL should be defined under the relevant 
conditions for the syscall in question to be available (and there should 
not be a syscalls.list entry for the syscall that does not exist).  I have 
not reviewed exactly what is right for sparc32 and sparc64 in this regard.
> 

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com