From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:55570 "EHLO
        foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1752044AbeEOIW2 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 15 May 2018 04:22:28 -0400
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 09:22:23 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com,
        catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/18] arm64: convert raw syscall invocation to C
Message-ID: <20180515082222.rcoyf6dsf2s2edgq@salmiak>
References: <20180514125351.GK7753@e103592.cambridge.arm.com>
 <20180514114104.oubxdf526hf2m6t5@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
 <20180514202445.GA26773@light.dominikbrodowski.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180514202445.GA26773@light.dominikbrodowski.net>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:24:45PM +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:41:10PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > I agree it would be nicer if it had a wrapper that took a pt_regs, even
> > if it does nothing with it.
> > 
> > We can't use SYSCALL_DEFINE0() due to the fault injection muck, we'd
> > need a ksys_ni_syscall() for our traps.c logic, and adding this
> > uniformly would involve some arch-specific rework for x86, too, so I
> > decided it was not worth the effort.
> 
> Couldn't you just open-code the "return -ENOSYS;" in traps.c?

I guess so. I was just worried that debug logic might be added to the generic
ni_syscall() in future, and wanted to avoid potential divergence.

> Error injection has no reasonable stable ABI/API expectations, so that's not
> a show-stopper either.

If people are happy with using SYSCALL_DEFINE0() for ni_syscall, I'm happy to
do that -- it's just that we'll need a fixup for x86 as that will change the
symbol name.

Thanks,
Mark.