Hi Firoz,
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 10:55 AM Firoz Khan firoz.khan@linaro.org wrote:
On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:53, Geert Uytterhoeven geert@linux-m68k.org wrote:
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 8:49 AM Firoz Khan firoz.khan@linaro.org wrote:
On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 11:36, Helge Deller deller@gmx.de wrote:
On 08.10.2018 07:52, Firoz Khan wrote:
<stdin>:696:2: warning: #warning syscall nfsservctl not implemented [-Wcpp] <stdin>:1335:2: warning: #warning syscall rseq not implemented [-Wcpp]
I added an IGNORE entry nfsservctl in script/checksyscalls.sh because this syscall is gone. But we definitely have to keep rseq entry on parisc architecture.
I prefer to keep the warning for rseq for now.
I'm fine with this.
It reminds me that we still may want the rseq syscall. If the warning is a problem, you may simply add the __IGNORE_rseq define.
But I still feel to keep an IGNORE entry, so once you test your patch; we can remove IGNORE entry and update the syscall.tbl.
If the warning is bogus (e.g. obsolete syscall), an IGNORE entry should be added.
nfsservctl look like an obsolete one, so I added an IGNORE entry in script/checksyscalls.h
Yes it is.
If the warning is due to a not-yet-implemented feature, IMHO it should not be silenced, as that would give the false impression that the feature is present and implemented.
Helge had done some implementation for rseq but not tested. So we either add an IGNORE entry or leave the warning as it is.
Personally, I prefer keeping the warning, for the above reason.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert