Hi Thomas, On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 05:40:31PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > The __nolibc_enosys() fallback is used when the UAPI headers do not > provide a certain syscall number or any possible fallback syscall. > This is either because the syscall definition is fairly new and nolibc > tries to be compatible with old UAPI headers or an architecture does not > support a syscall at all. > Many of these __nolibc_enosys() fallbacks have become unnecessary. > Either because the "new" syscalls or not so new anymore or real > fallbacks have been implemented in the meantime. > > Unnecessary usages of __nolibc_enosys() as it is not obvious anymore if > a given function is really implemented on all architectures. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <li...@weissschuh.net>
OK I reviewed it all and it's fine for me. Please note in patch 1's commit message, s/where added/were added/ :-) For the whole series: Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w...@1wt.eu> Thanks, Willy
