On Thursday 09 January 2014 11:55 AM, Baruch Siach wrote: > Hi Vineet, > > On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:28:19AM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote: >> On Sunday 05 January 2014 03:14 PM, Baruch Siach wrote: >>> Commit ee84b8b400 (linux: posix_fadvise: use new SYSCALL_ALIGN_64BIT) >>> removed posix_fadvise implementation for xtensa, since xtensa does not >>> define __NR_fadvise64. Reuse the ARM support code to restore xtensa support. >>> >>> This commit is based Mike Frysinger's suggested patch. >>> >>> Cc: Mike Frysinger <[email protected]> >>> Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> v2: Use Mike's approach, v1 was broken >>> --- >>> libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fadvise.c | 15 +++++++++++---- >>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fadvise.c >>> b/libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fadvise.c >>> index e102ce7afe31..25c294178e5e 100644 >>> --- a/libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fadvise.c >>> +++ b/libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fadvise.c >>> @@ -10,18 +10,25 @@ >>> >>> #include <sys/syscall.h> >>> >>> -#if defined(__NR_fadvise64) || defined(__NR_arm_fadvise64_64) >>> +#ifdef __NR_arm_fadvise64_64 >>> +/* We handle the 64bit alignment issue which is why the arm guys renamed >>> their >>> + * syscall in the first place. So rename it back. >>> + */ >>> +# define __NR_fadvise64_64 __NR_arm_fadvise64_64 >>> +#endif >>> + >>> +#if defined(__NR_fadvise64) || defined(__NR_fadvise64_64) >>> # include <fcntl.h> >>> # include <endian.h> >>> # include <bits/wordsize.h> >>> >>> -# ifdef __NR_arm_fadvise64_64 >>> +# ifdef __NR_fadvise64_64 >>> int posix_fadvise64(int fd, off64_t offset, off64_t len, int advice); >>> # endif >>> >>> int posix_fadvise(int fd, off_t offset, off_t len, int advice) >>> { >>> -# ifdef __NR_arm_fadvise64_64 >>> +# ifdef __NR_fadvise64_64 >>> return posix_fadvise64(fd, offset, len, advice); >>> # else >>> int ret; >>> @@ -41,7 +48,7 @@ int posix_fadvise(int fd, off_t offset, off_t len, int >>> advice) >>> return 0; >>> # endif >>> } >>> -# if defined __UCLIBC_HAS_LFS__ && ((!defined __NR_fadvise64_64 && >>> !defined __NR_arm_fadvise64_64) || __WORDSIZE == 64) >>> +# if defined __UCLIBC_HAS_LFS__ && (!defined __NR_fadvise64_64 || >>> __WORDSIZE == 64) >>> strong_alias(posix_fadvise,posix_fadvise64) >>> # endif >>> #endif >>> >> >> Thx for this fix, it unborks e2fsprogs build for ARC. However this doesn't >> build >> for !LFS. It seems !LFS breakage was introduced with 347567313 "add >> posix_fadvise() for arm" and confined only to ARM. Now that everyone uses >> same >> code, the damage is noticeable elsewhere too. >> >> The twist now is that, arches such as ARC/METAG are >> "no-legacy-syscalls-kernel ABI >> - so we only have __NR_fadvise64_64 (even for !LFS) >> >> I'll try to come up with a patch later today but just wanted to bring this to >> attention anyways. > > Thanks for testing. Looking forward to your patch. It's needed for xtensa as > well, I guess. I really wonder whether this !LFS is worth the trouble. How > much do you actually save when disabling LFS?
Personally I don't care much, however customers sometimes run into it and if the feature is there we might as well keep it working. -Vineet _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
