Re: [PATCH v2] linux-user/strace: Improve output of various syscalls

[Aleksandar Markovic]

On Thursday, November 21, 2019, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 11/21/19 6:00 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 21, 2019, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
> >
> >     On 11/21/19 9:19 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
> >
> >         On 20.11.19 23:20, Aleksandar Markovic wrote:
> >
> >             On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:13 PM Aleksandar Markovic
> >             <address@hidden
> >             <mailto:aleksandar.m.mail@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >                 On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 3:58 PM Helge Deller
> >                 <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >                     Improve strace output of various syscalls which
> >                     either have none
> >                     or only int-type parameters.
> >
> >
> >                 It would be nice if you included a history of the patch
> >                 (after the line
> >                 "---", as it is customary for single patch submission).
> >                 You changed
> >                 only ioctl() in v2, right?
> >
> >
> >         Yes. Will add history in next round.
> >
> >                 I missed your v2, but responded with several hints to v1.
> >
> >
> >         Yes, I saw all your mails.
> >         Thanks for your feedback!
> >
> >             userfaultfd(), membarrier(), mlock2()... - all could be
> >             included into
> >             your patch.
> >
> >
> >         I think there are quite some more which I didn't included.
> >         That's why I wrote "*various*" and not "*all*" in my changelog.
> >         I'm debugging other code, and the ones I fixed are the ones I
> >         actually tested with my code.
> >
> >
> >     If you don't have handy way to test the other syscalls, I'll rather
> >     restrict your patch to the one you tested, at least you are certain
> >     you didn't introduced regressions. Unless their implementation is
> >     trivial, of course.
> >
> >
> > What can be handier than writing a program that contains a single system call?
>
> Ahah very easy indeed :) Not noticing it shows how busy I am with firmware world than I forgot linux-user can be a simpler/powerful way to easily test stuff, as the Hexagon recent port also demonstrated.

Hexagon port doesn't have anything to do with this patch and didn't demonstrate anything new wrt linux-user. I have no idea what you meant to say.

But, OK, Helge is the submitter, and he decides on the scope of his patch. I am fine if he wants to limit it only to handful of syscalls. I just hinted he could increase the vslue of the patch significantly in an easy way.

Thanks,

Aleksandar