On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 09:26:08AM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
> > I'm wondering if just removing those lines I just quoted would be
> > the right thing to do (after applying your patch).
> >
>
> Removing these four lines may work but it will break the following:
>
> 209 output(1, "%s (%d) returned ENOSYS, marking as
> inactive.\n",
> 210 entry->name, call);
>
> 'call' will have the syscall (shm->syscall[childno].nr) number without
> the offset which will simply print the wrong syscall number for mips and
> ia64.
You're right. I just fixed this up in git after removing those other
lines yesterday.
> I am not that familiar with the code yet to be able to tell whether the
> 'search_syscall_table' or 'deactivate_syscall' functions need the offset
> as well or not.
They should be safe, as they use/return the number as index into the tables
we constructed. But shout if something looks odd, and I'll look into it.
Dave
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe trinity" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
