From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8956DC433F5 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 09:44:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB8C66103C for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 09:44:45 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org DB8C66103C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.linux.it Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03BB13C68B3 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 11:44:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (in-2.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E244C3C0CD6 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 11:44:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55751602281 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 11:44:31 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1635327870; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qSV4Q0RsC1sMCBjvDr/vmTUW79rSJWGj5FiGtcyF3AI=; b=CqzFmNKcATok93NmQgyWUmHgurD+GQqPMA/czoblwtP57+DcaSXivhqvbOxmkPFolj77gk 1KVDMvo0U6/QdzFNkdCcdAq5I0riqaqG3Gn2te1taE88WdIwYCFlNEw+zpGsUFYqNHvCOL dDjX3wty1nBPtHmw3gfW0HGCSVAgblc= Received: from mail-ot1-f69.google.com (mail-ot1-f69.google.com [209.85.210.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-173-I40dtywVOdaZwt8mjz02Nw-1; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 05:44:27 -0400 X-MC-Unique: I40dtywVOdaZwt8mjz02Nw-1 Received: by mail-ot1-f69.google.com with SMTP id 93-20020a9d0866000000b00553d3cbf050so525471oty.14 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 02:44:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qSV4Q0RsC1sMCBjvDr/vmTUW79rSJWGj5FiGtcyF3AI=; b=D9Ojp329g2UMOc00j1y4fuxPE4VmESkKHCEQKuE9yLVqpteOL3e0ziracH53eh2g3a 03F4XkEzm+ziHkkvrkPq7iEGXngEorMK2Yt4JKWLP95Kx6lEmNZu+pU/6NDpgFJl04RB H2vjyBZiUDPWQch4g2Dbw+Yj5Bfh8xV62zsl1tM2WcknO2Y2clWLa8M+LmkmCeV3CjC2 mAGLHRuOb+OXRAadtCZNgOrGEH1YDLyd7nGYYZWZTEvKwArjn/vRsqfTP6UskA3WWoTw FKfEJ62uEe5k/NDYh2ECXb0knaH5eYteWGa7Ee191k1CnA51BWhDVVTpCUJIJyQCky5K eSCg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ejY22WovzbgnV2PISuj1FdyU+AepHxK8h/YMsSgOOmCDDXjob H7BFerlYNEVh6S3TzPHF70yCQyqBiSXsSUAnTiZGwtpZcqdowV9SLISRfidIfDYVlwGLrxpvqsq LX2I2ysOGchLjL+Ul0eMxKPDb0uQ= X-Received: by 2002:aca:b4c4:: with SMTP id d187mr2738675oif.66.1635327866924; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 02:44:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwE3t/vHcFYWIT2m3bo8fqHpE4v/ZyWm1rMWvLN/fGLhe47t2NGN7hIs+iWbIifZivXFAGs2vn6JIpjyf3oKA8= X-Received: by 2002:aca:b4c4:: with SMTP id d187mr2738660oif.66.1635327866733; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 02:44:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <478982ce993a4eeb9ab3d00c8967a377@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <478982ce993a4eeb9ab3d00c8967a377@huawei.com> From: Jan Stancek Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 11:44:10 +0200 Message-ID: To: zhaogongyi Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=jstancek@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-2.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] lapi/syscalls: Add epoll_create for aarch64.in X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: LTP List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 11:36 AM zhaogongyi wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 5:28 AM zhaogongyi > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 9:49 AM Zhao Gongyi > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Add epoll_create for aarch64.in and modify the value of epoll_ctl > > > > > for aarch64.in. Otherwise, the testcase > > > > > epoll_create01/epoll_create02 will fail. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Gongyi > > > > > --- > > > > > include/lapi/syscalls/aarch64.in | 3 ++- > > > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/lapi/syscalls/aarch64.in > > > > > b/include/lapi/syscalls/aarch64.in > > > > > index a47185954..e9023a1d0 100644 > > > > > --- a/include/lapi/syscalls/aarch64.in > > > > > +++ b/include/lapi/syscalls/aarch64.in > > > > > @@ -19,7 +19,6 @@ getcwd 17 > > > > > lookup_dcookie 18 > > > > > eventfd2 19 > > > > > epoll_create1 20 > > > > > -epoll_ctl 21 > > > > > epoll_pwait 22 > > > > > dup 23 > > > > > dup3 24 > > > > > @@ -243,6 +242,8 @@ rt_tgsigqueueinfo 240 perf_event_open > > 241 > > > > > accept4 242 > > > > > recvmmsg 243 > > > > > +epoll_create 250 > > > > > +epoll_ctl 251 > > > > > > > > These values are for 32 bit only syscalls. Won't this break 64 bit? > > > > > > Yes, these values are for 32 bit only syscalls, the syscall epoll_create is > > not support for 64bit arm64. > > > > Right, adding epoll_create is OK, but changing epoll_ctl would break 64bit > > if there were any users of __NR_epoll_ctl. > > If we do not consider the running of 32bit program on arm64, we need to remove __NR_epoll_ctl. > > And the testcase using __NR_epoll_ctl will fail, is it a problem to be resolved? There are no testcases currently using __NR_epoll_ctl, but to avoid this potential issues in future, we can remove it. Existing testcases use libc epoll_ctl(). > > > > > > > > > Reference to man 2 epoll_create, we can see that > > epoll_create/epoll_create1 are supported If only we include the header > > file sys/epoll.h. > > > > > > Is it better that we call epoll_create replace to syscall > > __NR_epoll_create since some plateform not support it? > > > > I think so. We already use epoll_create() in other tests, so this looks like > > simplest solution for all arches. > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for you review! > > > > > > > > > > > > wait4 260 > > > > > prlimit64 261 > > > > > fanotify_init 262 > > > > > -- > > > > > 2.17.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp > > > > > > > > > -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp