On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 11:41:23AM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:29 AM, <dyo...@redhat.com> wrote: > > For old glibc there's no the syscall number this tests will cause > > make run_tests fail. > > Add a macro to define the number. This should be ok because it will be > > built in latest kernel source. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dave Young <dyo...@redhat.com> > > --- > > tools/testing/selftests/kcmp/kcmp_test.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > --- linux-2.6.orig/tools/testing/selftests/kcmp/kcmp_test.c 2012-11-23 > > 22:37:04.789058192 +0800 > > +++ linux-2.6/tools/testing/selftests/kcmp/kcmp_test.c 2012-11-23 > > 22:38:43.195191747 +0800 > > @@ -17,6 +17,9 @@ > > #include <sys/stat.h> > > #include <sys/wait.h> > > > > +#ifndef __NR_kcmp > > +#define __NR_kcmp 272 > > +#endif > > Is the syscall number really going to be the same across all architectures?
Oh, they are different. self NACK. Please ignore this patch. > > > static long sys_kcmp(int pid1, int pid2, int type, int fd1, int fd2) > > { > > return syscall(__NR_kcmp, pid1, pid2, type, fd1, fd2); > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/