Re: [PATCH] cris: Wire up missing syscalls

2015-06-05 Thread Chen Gang
On 6/3/15 23:23, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > Most people probably guessed correctly that this is related to > building the CRIS v10 kernel with the *-elf toolchain (which has > the convention that symbols are prefixed with underscores for > cris-*-elf and crisv32-*-elf) while (IIUC) the CRIS v32

Re: [PATCH] cris: Wire up missing syscalls

2015-06-05 Thread Chen Gang
On 6/3/15 23:23, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > Most people probably guessed correctly that this is related to > building the CRIS v10 kernel with the *-elf toolchain (which has > the convention that symbols are prefixed with underscores for > cris-*-elf and crisv32-*-elf) while (IIUC) the CRIS v32

Re: [PATCH] cris: Wire up missing syscalls

2015-06-04 Thread Chen Gang
On 06/04/2015 03:20 PM, Jesper Nilsson wrote: > On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 05:04:26PM +0200, Jesper Nilsson wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 01:36:47PM +0200, Chen Gang wrote: >>> - For v10, need we also use "sys*" instead of "_sys*"? >> >> No, the trick here is that v10 and v32 uses different stand

Re: [PATCH] cris: Wire up missing syscalls

2015-06-04 Thread Chen Gang
On 06/04/2015 03:20 PM, Jesper Nilsson wrote: > On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 05:04:26PM +0200, Jesper Nilsson wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 01:36:47PM +0200, Chen Gang wrote: >>> - For v10, need we also use "sys*" instead of "_sys*"? >> >> No, the trick here is that v10 and v32 uses different stand

Re: [PATCH] cris: Wire up missing syscalls

2015-06-04 Thread Jesper Nilsson
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 05:04:26PM +0200, Jesper Nilsson wrote: > On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 01:36:47PM +0200, Chen Gang wrote: > > - For v10, need we also use "sys*" instead of "_sys*"? > > No, the trick here is that v10 and v32 uses different standards > with regards to prefixing underscore. I'm h

Re: [PATCH] cris: Wire up missing syscalls

2015-06-03 Thread Hans-Peter Nilsson
> From: Jesper Nilsson > Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 17:04:26 +0200 > On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 01:36:47PM +0200, Chen Gang wrote: > > - For v10, need we also use "sys*" instead of "_sys*"? > > No, the trick here is that v10 and v32 uses different standards > with regards to prefixing underscore. I'm h

Re: [PATCH] cris: Wire up missing syscalls

2015-06-03 Thread Jesper Nilsson
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 01:36:47PM +0200, Chen Gang wrote: > On 06/03/2015 06:20 PM, Jesper Nilsson wrote: > > On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 03:48:12PM +0200, Chen Gang wrote: > >> The related warnings: > >> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang > > Thanks and applied, sorry for the long delay, I had to rewrite the

Re: [PATCH] cris: Wire up missing syscalls

2015-06-03 Thread Chen Gang
On 06/03/2015 06:20 PM, Jesper Nilsson wrote: > > On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 03:48:12PM +0200, Chen Gang wrote: >> The related warnings: >> >> CALLscripts/checksyscalls.sh >> :1229:2: warning: #warning syscall sched_setattr not implemented >> [-Wcpp] >> :1232:2: warning: #warning syscall

Re: [PATCH] cris: Wire up missing syscalls

2015-06-03 Thread Jesper Nilsson
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 03:48:12PM +0200, Chen Gang wrote: > The related warnings: > > CALLscripts/checksyscalls.sh > :1229:2: warning: #warning syscall sched_setattr not implemented > [-Wcpp] > :1232:2: warning: #warning syscall sched_getattr not implemented > [-Wcpp] > :1235:2:

[PATCH] cris: Wire up missing syscalls

2015-05-06 Thread Chen Gang
The related warnings: CALLscripts/checksyscalls.sh :1229:2: warning: #warning syscall sched_setattr not implemented [-Wcpp] :1232:2: warning: #warning syscall sched_getattr not implemented [-Wcpp] :1235:2: warning: #warning syscall renameat2 not implemented [-Wcpp] :1238:2: warni