From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753158AbeDRPUj (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:20:39 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:53614 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753001AbeDRPUg (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:20:36 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5E76E21745 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=rostedt@goodmis.org Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:20:33 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Dominik Brodowski , LKML , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, Wang Nan , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tracing/x86: Update syscall trace events to handle new x86 syscall func names Message-ID: <20180418112033.65632fef@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20180418151716.GC10084@kernel.org> References: <20180417130702.01575029@gandalf.local.home> <20180417172236.GA17342@light.dominikbrodowski.net> <20180417180430.GF3625@kernel.org> <20180417181304.GA2895@kernel.org> <20180417174128.0f3457f0@gandalf.local.home> <20180418125322.GB2895@kernel.org> <20180418103606.4118b35f@gandalf.local.home> <20180418150212.GA10084@kernel.org> <20180418151716.GC10084@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.16.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 12:17:16 -0300 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > This does the trick, by not using the main syscall routine, but one > called from it and not renamed, should work with older kernels. > > This test should be improved to look if the desired routine is in place, > if not just skip the test and tell about the unavailability of the > wanted function, but that is for later. Does this mean you can give me a "Tested-by" for that last patch? -- Steve