Re: deconflicting new syscall numbers for 6.11

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Fri, Jul 5, 2024, at 00:07, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 at 14:45, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> It's not random, it's all the architectures: the ones that
>> don't have a syscall.tbl file are the ones that use the table
>> in include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h.
>
> Ok.
>
> I think it's bogus to reseve system calls for everybody even when it
> makes no sense.

I see. Just to make sure: do you think it's ok to still
reserve system call numbers everywhere if they are used
on most architectures? I posted a series yesterday to
convert include/asm-generic/uapi/unistd.h into the syscall.tbl
format, and I did this change for clone3:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240704143611.2979589-8-arnd@xxxxxxxxxx/

The reasoning here is that we want this to be available
everywhere but there are four architectures still missing
it, and having the macro defined in the generated unistd.h
avoids a special case.

On the other hand, I left memfd_secret a special case since
that one is only implemented on one architecture using the
generic table.
 
> But it's also pretty moot, since I think the whole system call has to go away.
>
> All it is is an odd wrapper around mmap() anyway, and it's a useful
> enough thing *outside* of getrandom() that I pretty much guarantee it
> will be used for other things than vgetrandom anyway.

Right.

    Arnd