On 04/20/2015 06:29 PM, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 03:36:31PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >> On 04/18/2015 06:56 PM, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: >>> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 05:46:19PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >>>> On 04/18/2015 05:33 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >>>>> This commit adds strace support for Altera's Nios-II. The architecture >>>>> is supported by Linux since v3.19, and it implements the generic syscall >>>>> ABI. >>>>> >>>>> * Makefile.am, configure.ac: add nios2 files and support >>>>> * cacheflush.c: support nios2 cacheflush syscall >>>>> * linux/nios2/: arch-specific port >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <[email protected]> >>>>> --- >>>>> Makefile.am | 8 ++++++++ >>>>> cacheflush.c | 12 ++++++++++++ >>>>> configure.ac | 5 +++++ >>>>> linux/nios2/arch_regs.c | 2 ++ >>>>> linux/nios2/get_error.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ >>>>> linux/nios2/get_scno.c | 1 + >>>>> linux/nios2/get_syscall_args.c | 6 ++++++ >>>>> linux/nios2/ioctls_arch0.h | 1 + >>>>> linux/nios2/ioctls_inc0.h | 1 + >>>>> linux/nios2/print_pc.c | 1 + >>>>> linux/nios2/syscallent.h | 4 ++++ >>>>> 11 files changed, 55 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> BTW, forgot to version this correctly. Current patch >>>> is v4. For those interested, here's a link to the previous >>>> version: >>>> >>>> http://marc.info/?l=strace&m=139170929111223&w=2 >>>> >>>> This v4 patch had to be completely re-written, for two reasons. >>>> First, the Nios-II Linux port landed in mainline and now uses the >>>> generic syscall ABI. And also, strace arch-specific code was re-organized. >>>> >>>> The diffstat speaks for itself about the advantages of using the generic >>>> syscall ABI and the impact of the strace cleanup (consider v3 had roughly >>>> 500 insertions!). >>> >>> That's nice. >>> >>>> Finally, here's a tiny example of strace running Nios-II: >>>> >>>> # strace ls >>>> execve("/bin/ls", ["ls"], [/* 16 vars */]) = 0 >>> >>> Does it pass "make check" tests? >> >> Hm... I have a very limited test platform here. >> >> Can only boot limited size initramfs. I could try to fix my bootloader >> to allow bigger initramfs, but this might take a lot of time. >> >> Am I required to run 'make check' to merge this? > > No, this is not a strict requirement, but how do you know > that the new port works well? >
Well, I did run a few tests before posting this. Not rigorously, though. I can see about running some more tests... or I'll try to run make check natively next week-end and will report the results. -- Ezequiel Garcia, VanguardiaSur www.vanguardiasur.com.ar
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_ source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=VA_SF
_______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
