[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250219193007.GC14216@strace.io>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 21:30:07 +0200
From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...ace.io>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>
Cc: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Alexey Gladkov <legion@...nel.org>,
Eugene Syromyatnikov <evgsyr@...il.com>,
strace-devel@...ts.strace.io, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/6] syscall.h: introduce syscall_set_nr()
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 07:20:33PM +0000, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2025, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
[...]
> > Would you be OK with the following wording:
> > /*
> > * New syscall number has to be assigned to regs[2] because it is
> > * loaded from there unconditionally after syscall_trace_enter()
> > * invocation.
>
> May I suggest "[...] after return from syscall_trace_enter() invocation."
> instead? Minor reformatting might be required for better visual alignment
> though.
Like this:
/*
* New syscall number has to be assigned to regs[2] because
* it is loaded from there unconditionally after return from
* syscall_trace_enter() invocation.
*
* Consequently, if the syscall was indirect and nr != __NR_syscall,
* then after this assignment the syscall will cease to be indirect.
*/
?
--
ldv
Powered by blists - more mailing lists