Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdd fadvise64_64 syscall

[Kirill A. Shutemov]

On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 02:32:05PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 10:49:24AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 10:45:28PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
> > > Since it's only a hint, we can just add a happy passwtrough. Also
> > > from scratchbox.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Riku Voipio <address@hidden>
> > > -- 
> > > "rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups
> > 
> > > Index: trunk/linux-user/arm/syscall_nr.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- trunk.orig/linux-user/arm/syscall_nr.h        2008-09-07 
> > > 02:32:28.000000000 +0300
> > > +++ trunk/linux-user/arm/syscall_nr.h     2008-09-17 22:08:04.000000000 
> > > +0300
> > > @@ -273,6 +273,7 @@
> > >  #define TARGET_NR_fstatfs64                      267
> > >  #define TARGET_NR_tgkill                 268
> > >  #define TARGET_NR_utimes                 269
> > > +#define TARGET_NR_fadvise64_64                   270
> > >  #define TARGET_NR_arm_fadvise64_64               270
> > >  #define TARGET_NR_pciconfig_iobase               271
> > >  #define TARGET_NR_pciconfig_read         272
> 
> > It's wrong.
> > ARM doesn't provide fadvise64_64 syscall. It provides arm_fadvise64_64
> > with different argument order.
> 
> In this case, it doesn't matter since we don't use the arguments.

It matters if someone will provide true implementation of the syscall.

> Nevertheless it's decepting and I'll remove it.
> 
> > > Index: trunk/linux-user/syscall.c
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- trunk.orig/linux-user/syscall.c       2008-09-17 21:43:47.000000000 
> > > +0300
> > > +++ trunk/linux-user/syscall.c    2008-09-17 22:08:51.000000000 +0300
> > > @@ -5532,6 +5532,12 @@
> > >           }
> > >          break;
> > >  #endif
> > > +#ifdef TARGET_NR_fadvise64_64
> > > +     case TARGET_NR_fadvise64_64:
> > > +        /* This is a hint, so ignoring and returning success is ok.  */
> > > +        ret = get_errno(0);
> > > +        break;
> > > +#endif
> > >  #ifdef TARGET_NR_madvise
> > >      case TARGET_NR_madvise:
> > >          /* A straight passthrough may not be safe because qemu sometimes
> 
> > Who is this realization make happy?
> 
> EPARSE.
> 
> 
> -- 
> "rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups
> 
> 

-- 
Regards,  Kirill A. Shutemov
 + Belarus, Minsk
 + ALT Linux Team, http://www.altlinux.com/

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature