On 12/18/15 17:37, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>
> Le 18/12/2015 07:26, Chen Gang a écrit :
>>
>> For fcntl, it always needs to notice about it, just like do_fcntl() has
>> done, or it will cause issue (e.g. alpha host run i386 guest).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5...@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> linux-user/syscall.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
>> 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/linux-user/syscall.c b/linux-user/syscall.c
>> index 0f8adeb..1a60e6f 100644
>> --- a/linux-user/syscall.c
>> +++ b/linux-user/syscall.c
>> @@ -9007,7 +9007,8 @@ abi_long do_syscall(void *cpu_env, int num, abi_long
>> arg1,
>> if (((CPUARMState *)cpu_env)->eabi) {
>> if (!lock_user_struct(VERIFY_READ, target_efl, arg3, 1))
>> goto efault;
>> - fl.l_type = tswap16(target_efl->l_type);
>> + fl.l_type =
>> target_to_host_bitmask(tswap16(target_fl->l_type),
>> + flock_tbl);
>> fl.l_whence = tswap16(target_efl->l_whence);
>> fl.l_start = tswap64(target_efl->l_start);
>> fl.l_len = tswap64(target_efl->l_len);
>> @@ -9018,7 +9019,8 @@ abi_long do_syscall(void *cpu_env, int num, abi_long
>> arg1,
>> {
>> if (!lock_user_struct(VERIFY_READ, target_fl, arg3, 1))
>> goto efault;
>> - fl.l_type = tswap16(target_fl->l_type);
>> + fl.l_type =
>> target_to_host_bitmask(tswap16(target_fl->l_type),
>> + flock_tbl);
>> fl.l_whence = tswap16(target_fl->l_whence);
>> fl.l_start = tswap64(target_fl->l_start);
>> fl.l_len = tswap64(target_fl->l_len);
>> @@ -9031,7 +9033,8 @@ abi_long do_syscall(void *cpu_env, int num, abi_long
>> arg1,
>> if (((CPUARMState *)cpu_env)->eabi) {
>> if (!lock_user_struct(VERIFY_WRITE, target_efl, arg3,
>> 0))
>> goto efault;
>> - target_efl->l_type = tswap16(fl.l_type);
>> + target_efl->l_type = host_to_target_bitmask(
>> + tswap16(fl.l_type),
>> flock_tbl);
>> target_efl->l_whence = tswap16(fl.l_whence);
>> target_efl->l_start = tswap64(fl.l_start);
>> target_efl->l_len = tswap64(fl.l_len);
>> @@ -9042,7 +9045,8 @@ abi_long do_syscall(void *cpu_env, int num, abi_long
>> arg1,
>> {
>> if (!lock_user_struct(VERIFY_WRITE, target_fl, arg3,
>> 0))
>> goto efault;
>> - target_fl->l_type = tswap16(fl.l_type);
>> + target_fl->l_type = host_to_target_bitmask(
>> + tswap16(fl.l_type),
>> flock_tbl);
>> target_fl->l_whence = tswap16(fl.l_whence);
>> target_fl->l_start = tswap64(fl.l_start);
>> target_fl->l_len = tswap64(fl.l_len);
>> @@ -9058,7 +9062,8 @@ abi_long do_syscall(void *cpu_env, int num, abi_long
>> arg1,
>> if (((CPUARMState *)cpu_env)->eabi) {
>> if (!lock_user_struct(VERIFY_READ, target_efl, arg3, 1))
>> goto efault;
>> - fl.l_type = tswap16(target_efl->l_type);
>> + fl.l_type =
>> target_to_host_bitmask(tswap16(target_fl->l_type),
>> + flock_tbl);
>> fl.l_whence = tswap16(target_efl->l_whence);
>> fl.l_start = tswap64(target_efl->l_start);
>> fl.l_len = tswap64(target_efl->l_len);
>> @@ -9069,7 +9074,8 @@ abi_long do_syscall(void *cpu_env, int num, abi_long
>> arg1,
>> {
>> if (!lock_user_struct(VERIFY_READ, target_fl, arg3, 1))
>> goto efault;
>> - fl.l_type = tswap16(target_fl->l_type);
>> + fl.l_type =
>> target_to_host_bitmask(tswap16(target_fl->l_type),
>> + flock_tbl);
>> fl.l_whence = tswap16(target_fl->l_whence);
>> fl.l_start = tswap64(target_fl->l_start);
>> fl.l_len = tswap64(target_fl->l_len);
>>
>
> This patch looks good to me, except that script/checkpatch.pl complains
> about "DOS line ending" and "line over 80 characters".
>
I did not get any script/checkpatch.pl complains, originally.
Does my email client configuration is incorrect, then cause incorrect
mail format? I guess not. The related reason is below.
- I copy your full reply mail contents to a new file (diff.patch).
- Remove all '> ' in vi editor (1,% s/^> //g) (so get the original
patch contents).
- ./script/checkpatch.pl diff.patch, it has no any complains.
> Reviewed-by: Laurent Vivier <laur...@vivier.eu>
>
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed
