From: Hyok S. Choi <[email protected]>
For some architectures, a few syscalls are not linked in noMMU mode.
In that case, the MMU depending syscalls are needed to be defined
as 'cond_syscall'. For example, ARM architecture selectively links
sys_mlock by the mode configuration.
In case of FRV, it has been managed by #ifdef CONFIG_MMU macro in
arch/frv/kernel/entry.S. However these conditional macros are just
duplicates if they were defined as cond_syscall. Compilation test
is done with FRV toolchains for both of MMU and noMMU mode.
Signed-off-by: Hyok S. Choi <[email protected]>
---
arch/frv/kernel/entry.S | 26 ++++++++++----------------
kernel/sys_ni.c | 12 ++++++++++++
2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S b/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S
index 1d21c8d..a9b5952 100644
--- a/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S
+++ b/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S
@@ -1170,12 +1170,6 @@ __syscall_badsys:
# syscall vector table
#
###############################################################################
-#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
-#define __MMU(X) X
-#else
-#define __MMU(X) sys_ni_syscall
-#endif
-
.section .rodata
ALIGN
.globl sys_call_table
@@ -1305,7 +1299,7 @@ sys_call_table:
.long sys_newuname
.long sys_ni_syscall /* old "cacheflush" */
.long sys_adjtimex
- .long __MMU(sys_mprotect) /* 125 */
+ .long sys_mprotect /* 125 */
.long sys_sigprocmask
.long sys_ni_syscall /* old "create_module" */
.long sys_init_module
@@ -1324,16 +1318,16 @@ sys_call_table:
.long sys_getdents
.long sys_select
.long sys_flock
- .long __MMU(sys_msync)
+ .long sys_msync
.long sys_readv /* 145 */
.long sys_writev
.long sys_getsid
.long sys_fdatasync
.long sys_sysctl
- .long __MMU(sys_mlock) /* 150 */
- .long __MMU(sys_munlock)
- .long __MMU(sys_mlockall)
- .long __MMU(sys_munlockall)
+ .long sys_mlock /* 150 */
+ .long sys_munlock
+ .long sys_mlockall
+ .long sys_munlockall
.long sys_sched_setparam
.long sys_sched_getparam /* 155 */
.long sys_sched_setscheduler
@@ -1343,7 +1337,7 @@ sys_call_table:
.long sys_sched_get_priority_min /* 160 */
.long sys_sched_rr_get_interval
.long sys_nanosleep
- .long __MMU(sys_mremap)
+ .long sys_mremap
.long sys_setresuid16
.long sys_getresuid16 /* 165 */
.long sys_ni_syscall /* for vm86 */
@@ -1398,8 +1392,8 @@ sys_call_table:
.long sys_setfsuid /* 215 */
.long sys_setfsgid
.long sys_pivot_root
- .long __MMU(sys_mincore)
- .long __MMU(sys_madvise)
+ .long sys_mincore
+ .long sys_madvise
.long sys_getdents64 /* 220 */
.long sys_fcntl64
.long sys_ni_syscall /* reserved for TUX */
@@ -1437,7 +1431,7 @@ sys_call_table:
.long sys_epoll_create
.long sys_epoll_ctl /* 255 */
.long sys_epoll_wait
- .long __MMU(sys_remap_file_pages)
+ .long sys_remap_file_pages
.long sys_set_tid_address
.long sys_timer_create
.long sys_timer_settime /* 260 */
diff --git a/kernel/sys_ni.c b/kernel/sys_ni.c
index d82864c..5433195 100644
--- a/kernel/sys_ni.c
+++ b/kernel/sys_ni.c
@@ -120,3 +120,15 @@ cond_syscall(sys32_sysctl);
cond_syscall(ppc_rtas);
cond_syscall(sys_spu_run);
cond_syscall(sys_spu_create);
+
+/* mmu depending weak syscall entries */
+cond_syscall(sys_mprotect);
+cond_syscall(sys_msync);
+cond_syscall(sys_mlock);
+cond_syscall(sys_munlock);
+cond_syscall(sys_mlockall);
+cond_syscall(sys_munlockall);
+cond_syscall(sys_mincore);
+cond_syscall(sys_madvise);
+cond_syscall(sys_mremap);
+cond_syscall(sys_remap_file_pages);
--
Hyok
ARM Linux 2.6 MPU/noMMU Project http://opensrc.sec.samsung.com/
"Hyok S. Choi" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> diff --git a/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S b/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S
> index 1d21c8d..a9b5952 100644
> --- a/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S
> +++ b/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S
Your email client mangled this patch more than I am prepared to unmangle
it. Probably you need to use a text/plain attachment when resending,
please.
On Thursday 30 March 2006 08:32 am, Andrew Morton wrote:
> "Hyok S. Choi" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S b/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S
> > index 1d21c8d..a9b5952 100644
> > --- a/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S
> > +++ b/arch/frv/kernel/entry.S
>
> Your email client mangled this patch more than I am prepared to unmangle
> it. Probably you need to use a text/plain attachment when resending,
> please.
Okay, I've attached the patch.
(BTW, I could not guess what part of my previous mail was mangled. I found no
problem when I got the patch from the mailing-list, by gmail?)
--
Hyok
ARM Linux 2.6 MPU/noMMU Project http://opensrc.sec.samsung.com/
"Hyok S. Choi" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> (BTW, I could not guess what part of my previous mail was mangled. I found no
> problem when I got the patch from the mailing-list, by gmail?)
It looks like your email client did RFC2464(?) space-stuffing. Perhaps
your client unstuffs too (if that's possible), in which case you wouldn't
see it.
I don't know, but I'm sure I'm about to find out ;)