mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: "Thomas Weißschuh" <linux@weissschuh.net>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] tools/nolibc: reduce __nolibc_enosys() fallbacks
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2025 12:28:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250823102855.GA21208@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250821-nolibc-enosys-v1-0-4b63f2caaa89@weissschuh.net>

Hi Thomas,

On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 05:40:31PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> The __nolibc_enosys() fallback is used when the UAPI headers do not
> provide a certain syscall number or any possible fallback syscall.
> This is either because the syscall definition is fairly new and nolibc
> tries to be compatible with old UAPI headers or an architecture does not
> support a syscall at all.
> Many of these __nolibc_enosys() fallbacks have become unnecessary.
> Either because the "new" syscalls or not so new anymore or real
> fallbacks have been implemented in the meantime.
> 
> Unnecessary usages of __nolibc_enosys() as it is not obvious anymore if
> a given function is really implemented on all architectures.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>

OK I reviewed it all and it's fine for me. Please note in patch 1's
commit message, s/where added/were added/ :-)

For the whole series:
  Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>

Thanks,
Willy

      parent reply	other threads:[~2025-08-23 10:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-21 15:40 Thomas Weißschuh
2025-08-21 15:40 ` [PATCH 1/7] tools/nolibc: remove __nolibc_enosys() fallback from time64-related functions Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-01  7:43   ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-10-06 20:14     ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-07 10:03       ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-08-21 15:40 ` [PATCH 2/7] tools/nolibc: remove __nolibc_enosys() fallback from *at() functions Thomas Weißschuh
2025-08-21 15:40 ` [PATCH 3/7] tools/nolibc: remove __nolibc_enosys() fallback from dup2() Thomas Weißschuh
2025-08-21 15:40 ` [PATCH 4/7] tools/nolibc: remove __nolibc_enosys() fallback from fork functions Thomas Weißschuh
2025-08-21 15:40 ` [PATCH 5/7] tools/nolibc: fold llseek fallback into lseek() Thomas Weißschuh
2025-08-21 15:40 ` [PATCH 6/7] kselftest/arm64: tpidr2: Switch to waitpid() over wait4() Thomas Weißschuh
2025-08-21 17:41   ` Mark Brown
2025-08-26 19:35   ` Catalin Marinas
2025-08-21 15:40 ` [PATCH 7/7] tools/nolibc: drop wait4() support Thomas Weißschuh
2025-08-23 10:28 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20250823102855.GA21208@1wt.eu \
    --to=w@1wt.eu \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@weissschuh.net \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®