On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 10:56:49PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > * Dmitry V. Levin <l...@altlinux.org> [2015-12-15 14:59:32 +0300]: > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 12:02:31PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > > * Dmitry V. Levin <l...@altlinux.org> [2015-12-15 00:35:56 +0300]: > > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:05:50PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > > > > --- a/linux/ia64/syscallent.h > > > > > +++ b/linux/ia64/syscallent.h > > > > > @@ -31,10 +31,10 @@ > > > > > * with 64-bit layout get redirected to printargs. > > > > > */ > > > > > #undef SYS_FUNC_NAME > > > > > -#define SYS_FUNC_NAME(syscall_name) printargs > > > > > +#define SYS_FUNC_NAME(syscall_name) sys_printargs > > > > > > > > You don't need this, sys_printargs is a macro defined to printargs. > > > > > > i haven't tested it on ia64, but it seemed to me > > > that redirecting sys_* to sys_printargs for i386 > > > syscalls was intentional. > > > > Yes, the redirection itself is intentional, but there is no difference > > whether > > it's printargs or sys_printargs. > > ah ok > > attached an updated patch with that fix.
Applied, thanks. > i ran the tests and had some failures, some of them > might be musl bugs, but at least the %Lu printf format > specifier used in some tests is invalid. No problem, changed all %Ld/%Lu to %lld/%llu. > (%L is for long double, for long long unsigned use %llu) > attached the test logs too Looks like all tests related to %Ld/%Lu failed. Could you re-run them on v4.10-577-ge67c8e4, please? -- ldv
pgp_Cm3Yvv_d4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list Strace-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
