Hi, On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 13:08 +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote: > On 3 November 2014 12:32, Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote: > > On Monday 03 November 2014 12:06:06 Vincent Guittot wrote: > > > On 24 October 2014 16:45, Ivan T. Ivanov <iiva...@mm-sol.com> wrote: > > > > --- > > > > libdl/dl_syscalls.h | 5 +++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/libdl/dl_syscalls.h b/libdl/dl_syscalls.h > > > > index 8d70056..85dc1e9 100644 > > > > --- a/libdl/dl_syscalls.h > > > > +++ b/libdl/dl_syscalls.h > > > > @@ -39,6 +39,11 @@ > > > > #define __NR_sched_getattr 381 > > > > #endif > > > > > > > > +#ifdef __aarch64__ > > > > +#define __NR_sched_setattr 380 > > > > +#define __NR_sched_getattr 381 > > > > +#endif > > > > > > Hi Ivan, > > > > > > we have same values for __arm__, can't we merge both declaration on one ? > > > > > > > arm64 uses 274 and 275 instead of 380 and 381.
Probably I have been mistaken by arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd32.h which uses same numbers like arm. > > > > Why can't libdl just include asm/unistd.h to get the numbers for the > > architecture it's compiling for? > you're right, it should. Just for my clarification. We are talking about headers installed by linux kernel or provided by compiler tool chain? I am unable to find above syscall numbers in gcc-linaro-arm-linux-gnueabihf-4.9-2014.09, for example. Regards, Ivan > IIRC, this header file has been created because the syscall was not > yet defined and available when the tool has been created > > Vincent > > > Arnd > _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
