Hi Vineet, On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:28:19AM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote: > On Sunday 05 January 2014 03:14 PM, Baruch Siach wrote: > > Commit ee84b8b400 (linux: posix_fadvise: use new SYSCALL_ALIGN_64BIT) > > removed posix_fadvise implementation for xtensa, since xtensa does not > > define __NR_fadvise64. Reuse the ARM support code to restore xtensa support. > > > > This commit is based Mike Frysinger's suggested patch. > > > > Cc: Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> > > Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <bar...@tkos.co.il> > > --- > > v2: Use Mike's approach, v1 was broken > > --- > > libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fadvise.c | 15 +++++++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fadvise.c > > b/libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fadvise.c > > index e102ce7afe31..25c294178e5e 100644 > > --- a/libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fadvise.c > > +++ b/libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fadvise.c > > @@ -10,18 +10,25 @@ > > > > #include <sys/syscall.h> > > > > -#if defined(__NR_fadvise64) || defined(__NR_arm_fadvise64_64) > > +#ifdef __NR_arm_fadvise64_64 > > +/* We handle the 64bit alignment issue which is why the arm guys renamed > > their > > + * syscall in the first place. So rename it back. > > + */ > > +# define __NR_fadvise64_64 __NR_arm_fadvise64_64 > > +#endif > > + > > +#if defined(__NR_fadvise64) || defined(__NR_fadvise64_64) > > # include <fcntl.h> > > # include <endian.h> > > # include <bits/wordsize.h> > > > > -# ifdef __NR_arm_fadvise64_64 > > +# ifdef __NR_fadvise64_64 > > int posix_fadvise64(int fd, off64_t offset, off64_t len, int advice); > > # endif > > > > int posix_fadvise(int fd, off_t offset, off_t len, int advice) > > { > > -# ifdef __NR_arm_fadvise64_64 > > +# ifdef __NR_fadvise64_64 > > return posix_fadvise64(fd, offset, len, advice); > > # else > > int ret; > > @@ -41,7 +48,7 @@ int posix_fadvise(int fd, off_t offset, off_t len, int > > advice) > > return 0; > > # endif > > } > > -# if defined __UCLIBC_HAS_LFS__ && ((!defined __NR_fadvise64_64 && > > !defined __NR_arm_fadvise64_64) || __WORDSIZE == 64) > > +# if defined __UCLIBC_HAS_LFS__ && (!defined __NR_fadvise64_64 || > > __WORDSIZE == 64) > > strong_alias(posix_fadvise,posix_fadvise64) > > # endif > > #endif > > > > Thx for this fix, it unborks e2fsprogs build for ARC. However this doesn't > build > for !LFS. It seems !LFS breakage was introduced with 347567313 "add > posix_fadvise() for arm" and confined only to ARM. Now that everyone uses same > code, the damage is noticeable elsewhere too. > > The twist now is that, arches such as ARC/METAG are > "no-legacy-syscalls-kernel ABI > - so we only have __NR_fadvise64_64 (even for !LFS) > > I'll try to come up with a patch later today but just wanted to bring this to > attention anyways.
Thanks for testing. Looking forward to your patch. It's needed for xtensa as well, I guess. I really wonder whether this !LFS is worth the trouble. How much do you actually save when disabling LFS? baruch -- http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - bar...@tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il - _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc