On Fri, 2026-03-20 at 11:45 +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote: > > > So I would perhaps prefer to stay with the logic that defines > > > FN_PREFIX > > > per architecture and has also #else branch for the rest. And more > > > comments > > > never hurt. > > > > Agreed. > > Hm, so I thought about a bit more and I very likely misunderstood the > motivation behind the patch. I will speculate and correct me if I am > wrong, please. The idea behind the whole patch set is to make the > selftests run on older kernels which I think is something we should > support. The issue is that old kernels (like mentioned 4.12) do not > have > syscall wrappers at all. getpid() syscall is just plain old > sys_getpid > there and not the current __x64_sys_getpid on x86. The patch fixes it > by checking CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER and defining FN_PREFIX > accordingly.
Exactly. The definition was added on commit 1bd21c6c21e848996339508d3ffb106d505256a8 Author: Dominik Brodowski <[email protected]> Date: Thu Apr 5 11:53:01 2018 +0200 syscalls/core: Introduce CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER=y > > So, if this is correct, I think it should be done differently. We > should > have something like syscall_wrapper.h which would define FN_PREFIX > for > the supported architectures and different kernel versions since the > wrappers may have changed a couple of times during the history. In > that > case there could then be an #else branch which might just error out > with > the message to add proper syscall wrapper naming. Well, it seems too much for a simple test to me, but I can do that, no problem. > > The changelog then should explain it because it is not in fact tight > to > powerpc. Makes sense, I'll change it. > > What do you think? Am I off again? I agree with everything, but adding another header file seems a little too much work for a simple test case, but it's doable. Let me work on it. > > Miroslav
