Message ID | 1542101513-22010-1-git-send-email-firoz.khan@linaro.org |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | alpha: system call table generation support | expand |
Hi Folks, On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 15:02, Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > The purpose of this patch series is, we can easily > add/modify/delete system call table support by cha- > nging entry in syscall.tbl file instead of manually > changing many files. The other goal is to unify the > system call table generation support implementation > across all the architectures. > > The system call tables are in different format in > all architecture. It will be difficult to manually > add, modify or delete the system calls in the resp- > ective files manually. To make it easy by keeping a > script and which'll generate uapi header file and > syscall table file. > > syscall.tbl contains the list of available system > calls along with system call number and correspond- > ing entry point. Add a new system call in this arch- > itecture will be possible by adding new entry in the > syscall.tbl file. > > Adding a new table entry consisting of: > - System call number. > - ABI. > - System call name. > - Entry point name. > > ARM, s390 and x86 architecuture does exist the sim- > ilar support. I leverage their implementation to > come up with a generic solution. > > I have done the same support for work for ia64, m68k, > microblaze, mips, parisc, powerpc, sh, sparc and xtensa. > Below mentioned git repository contains more details > about the workflow. > > https://github.com/frzkhn/system_call_table_generator/ > > Finally, this is the ground work to solve the Y2038 > issue. We need to add two dozen of system calls to > solve Y2038 issue. So this patch series will help to > add new system calls easily by adding new entry in > the syscall.tbl. > > changes since v2: > - changed from generic-y to generated-y in Kbuild. > - made changes in syscall.tbl for removing entry - > alpha_ni_syscall. > > changes since v1: > - optimized/updated the syscall table generation > scripts. > - fixed all mixed indentation issues in syscall.tbl. > - added "comments" in syscall.tbl. > - enclosed __NR_sycalls macro with __KERNEL__. > - added missing new line. > > Firoz Khan (5): > alpha: move __IGNORE* entries to non uapi header > alpha: remove CONFIG_OSF4_COMPAT flag from syscall table > alpha: add __NR_syscalls along with NR_SYSCALLS > alpha: add system call table generation support > alpha: generate uapi header and syscall table header files Could someone review this patch series and queue it for 4.21 through alpha tree would be great. Thanks Firoz
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 10:18 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 15:02, Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > The purpose of this patch series is, we can easily > > add/modify/delete system call table support by cha- > > nging entry in syscall.tbl file instead of manually > > changing many files. The other goal is to unify the > > system call table generation support implementation > > across all the architectures. > > > > The system call tables are in different format in > > all architecture. It will be difficult to manually > > add, modify or delete the system calls in the resp- > > ective files manually. To make it easy by keeping a > > script and which'll generate uapi header file and > > syscall table file. > > > > syscall.tbl contains the list of available system > > calls along with system call number and correspond- > > ing entry point. Add a new system call in this arch- > > itecture will be possible by adding new entry in the > > syscall.tbl file. > > > > Adding a new table entry consisting of: > > - System call number. > > - ABI. > > - System call name. > > - Entry point name. > > > > ARM, s390 and x86 architecuture does exist the sim- > > ilar support. I leverage their implementation to > > come up with a generic solution. > > > > I have done the same support for work for ia64, m68k, > > microblaze, mips, parisc, powerpc, sh, sparc and xtensa. > > Below mentioned git repository contains more details > > about the workflow. > > > > https://github.com/frzkhn/system_call_table_generator/ > > > > Finally, this is the ground work to solve the Y2038 > > issue. We need to add two dozen of system calls to > > solve Y2038 issue. So this patch series will help to > > add new system calls easily by adding new entry in > > the syscall.tbl. > > > > changes since v2: > > - changed from generic-y to generated-y in Kbuild. > > - made changes in syscall.tbl for removing entry - > > alpha_ni_syscall. > > > > changes since v1: > > - optimized/updated the syscall table generation > > scripts. > > - fixed all mixed indentation issues in syscall.tbl. > > - added "comments" in syscall.tbl. > > - enclosed __NR_sycalls macro with __KERNEL__. > > - added missing new line. > > > > Firoz Khan (5): > > alpha: move __IGNORE* entries to non uapi header > > alpha: remove CONFIG_OSF4_COMPAT flag from syscall table > > alpha: add __NR_syscalls along with NR_SYSCALLS > > alpha: add system call table generation support > > alpha: generate uapi header and syscall table header files > > Could someone review this patch series and queue it for 4.21 > through alpha tree would be great. Thank you! I'll take a look.
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 10:18 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 15:02, Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > Could someone review this patch series and queue it for 4.21 > > through alpha tree would be great. > > Thank you! I'll take a look. Hi Matt, I see that you merged the changes a while ago into git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mattst88/alpha#for-linus This all seems fine, but they never showed up in linux-next, which his what had both Firoz and me confused. Is that intentional, or should it be added there? Added Stephen to Cc here in case you want it added. Arnd
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:08 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 10:18 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 15:02, Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > Could someone review this patch series and queue it for 4.21 > > > through alpha tree would be great. > > > > Thank you! I'll take a look. > > Hi Matt, > > I see that you merged the changes a while ago into > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mattst88/alpha#for-linus > > This all seems fine, but they never showed up in linux-next, > which his what had both Firoz and me confused. > > Is that intentional, or should it be added there? Probably so. This is just a super part-time thing for me, so I've never figured out what I needed to do to be included in linux-next. > Added Stephen to Cc here in case you want it added. Thanks!
Hi Matt, On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 11:46:59 -0500 Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com> wrote: > > Probably so. This is just a super part-time thing for me, so I've > never figured out what I needed to do to be included in linux-next. The requirements are: "You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your tree/series have been: * submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the Contributor's Signed-off-by, * posted to the relevant mailing list, * reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem tree), * successfully unit tested, and * destined for the current or next Linux merge window. Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him to fetch). It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary." Just send me an email with the URL of a git tree that has a branch that I can fetch every day. However, I am not doing any releases until Jan 2, so it will be included then. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell