Hi Yann, Yann Sionneau wrote, > Hi Waldemar, > > It's just not clear to me what __UCLIBC_HAVE_STATX__ is supposed to mean. > > Does it mean the kernel supports the syscall?
I would say yes. It is for newer architectures which only support statx like c-sky. At least that is the reason it was introduced. The old functions are not available for c-sky. Now it is also used by kvx. > Or does it mean the arch want to expose some "statx" function which wraps the > statx syscall? (because statx is non POSIX and is Linux specific) > > In the first scenario I would think that it seems redundant with just checking > __NR_statx It seems not to be redundant, as you can see it breaks some architectures which in newer kernels define __NR_statx, but the old functions still are available and working fine like mips64 n32. > In the second scenario I would think that even if the arch does not want to > expose a statx() function in the libc, the arch would still want to wrap the > "old" functions (fstatat, stat, etc) around the new statx syscall, right? > > In any case I am interested in understanding which of the 2 scenario is > correct: what does __UCLIBC_HAVE_STATX__ mean? > > Also, indeed I can see that in other files the check is done like this `#if > defined __NR_statx && defined __UCLIBC_HAVE_STATX__` but maybe we need to make > sure this is correct, and if it's not, fix this. I at least hope this is correct, yes. > I hope I'm helping and not making this more complex than it's already is :) Is it now sufficiently explained? Can I push the change? best regards Waldemar _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@uclibc-ng.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@uclibc-ng.org
