Re: [PATCH] Set unknown_syscall differently on arm linux

[Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 06/28/2016 10:26 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
>> Currently, we use 123456789 as unknown or illegal syscall number, and
>> expect program return ENOSYS.  Although 123456789 is an illegal syscall
>> number on arm linux, kernel sends SIGILL rather than returns -ENOSYS.
>> However, arm linux kernel returns -ENOSYS if syscall number is within
>> 0xf0001..0xf07ff, so we can use 0xf07ff for unknown_syscall in test.
>>
>
> I think it'd be good if this was converted to a comment in the source.
>

OK, I move them into the comments as below,

+#if defined(__arm__)
+/* Although 123456789 is an illegal syscall umber on arm linux, kernel
+   sends SIGILL rather than returns -ENOSYS.  However, arm linux kernel
+   returns -ENOSYS if syscall number is within 0xf0001..0xf07ff, so we
+   can use 0xf07ff for unknown_syscall in test.  */
+int unknown_syscall = 0x0f07ff;
+#else
 int unknown_syscall = 123456789;
+#endif

patch is pushed in.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)