Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86: use the correct function type for sys_ni_syscall

[Will Deacon]

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 05:27:40PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Sep 13, 2019, at 4:26 PM, Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 3:45 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Should this be SYSCALL_DEFINE0?
> > 
> > It can be, and that would also fix the issue. However, it does result
> > in unnecessary error injection to be hooked up here, which is why
> > arm64 preferred to avoid the macro when I fixed it there. S390 uses
> > SYSCALL_DEFINE0 for this though and since sys_ni_syscall always
> > returns -ENOSYS, it shouldn't be a huge problem. Thoughts?
> > 
> 
> I donât see why all syscalls except these  few should have error injection
> hooked up.  Itâs also IMO nicer from a maintenance perspective to have all
> syscalls use the same macros.
> 
> Will, is there something Iâm missing?

There was a reasonable request from Mark (CC'd) not to allow error injection
for unimplemented system calls, so that's why we took the approach that we
did. There was also a vague plan to fix this for everybody [1] but evidently
nobody found the time :(

Will

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190524215821.GA37129@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#m6519b2aad06d8c384de1f55256f08687c83d8796