Re: [PATCH 0/7] tools/nolibc: reduce __nolibc_enosys() fallbacks

[Willy Tarreau]

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 <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

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@xxxxxx>

Thanks,
Willy