From: Jan S. <jst...@re...> - 2013-04-24 16:07:58
|
----- Original Message ----- > From: ch...@su... > To: "Mike Frysinger" <va...@ge...> > Cc: "Jan Stancek" <jst...@re...>, ltp...@li... > Sent: Wednesday, 24 April, 2013 5:58:11 PM > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/cma: add runtime check to setup() > > Hi! > > > > delete all the "#else" branches since you're now using > > > > linux_syscall_numbers.h > > > > > > Without that check in parent, you can end up in situation where some > > > child > > > aborts first and then parent reports failure. By doing it early in > > > setup() > > > you can avoid allocating resources that won't go away when process later > > > terminates with TCONF. > > > > by including linux_syscall_numbers.h, you've guaranteed that > > __NR_process_vm_readv will always be defined, thus the code under "#ifndef > > __NR_process_vm_readv" will never be run, thus you should delete it. Agreed, but I'll hold off from posting v2 for a bit since it depends on outcome of linux_syscall_numbers.h discussion. > > Not until these are added to at least one of the in files and > linux_syscall_numbers.h are regenerated. > > Which is why we started to fiddle with the kernel/include directory in > the first place. I did regenerate it in my first try and diff on this file was huge, which triggered the question if we want to keep it in tree. Regards, Jan > > -- > Cyril Hrubis > ch...@su... > |