linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Run checksyscalls for N32 and O32 ABI

To: sam@ravnborg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Run checksyscalls for N32 and O32 ABI
From: Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 22:51:54 +0900 (JST)
Cc: vagabon.xyz@gmail.com, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20070512185854.GA8647@uranus.ravnborg.org>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <cda58cb80705111223y5e94eafcy710b878517c48c48@mail.gmail.com> <20070513.014713.74753298.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20070512185854.GA8647@uranus.ravnborg.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Sat, 12 May 2007 20:58:54 +0200, Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote:
> > Subject: [PATCH] MIPS: Simplify missing-syscalls for N32 and O32
> 
> This is overengineered. The only reason to make the syscall check
> for each and every build was that this was easy and the missing syscalls
> are easy to spot during a normal build.
> But checking all combinations is just not worth it.
> The arch responsible are assumed to build for the different architectures
> once in a while so a missing syscall are likely to be detected anyway.
> 
> We cannot run each and every consistency check in all combinations
> for each build - that would end in only build noise.

Well, 64-bit MIPS has three ABIs and each ABI has complete set of
syscalls.  So a result of default "missing-syscalls" target (which is
for N64 ABI) is not useful at all for other two ABIs.

I think checking them is worth even if the S/N ratio was quite low.
---
Atsushi Nemoto

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>