From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 72289 invoked by alias); 10 Nov 2016 13:05:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 72275 invoked by uid 89); 10 Nov 2016 13:05:27 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=consolidates, HX-HELO:sk:homiema, accessc, UD:access.c X-HELO: homiemail-a78.g.dreamhost.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] New internal function __access_noerrno To: Adhemerval Zanella , libc-alpha@sourceware.org References: <1477320168-23397-1-git-send-email-siddhesh@sourceware.org> <1477320168-23397-3-git-send-email-siddhesh@sourceware.org> <317e63c8-1681-84b1-e278-c6ecae71e657@linaro.org> <4f13d235-084b-25f8-b763-053889b0dfdb@gotplt.org> <9fee5a6f-bde3-6f5f-d8ee-5ab6c8771873@gotplt.org> <67e3afd8-d1ea-ef52-dcf4-c8c4372a3410@linaro.org> From: Siddhesh Poyarekar Message-ID: Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 13:05:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <67e3afd8-d1ea-ef52-dcf4-c8c4372a3410@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg00393.txt.bz2 On Thursday 10 November 2016 05:44 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: > In this branch [1] I have a WIP for this. First patch basically > consolidates access Linux implementation and it uses the strategy > to check for __NR_access first (and since it on sysdeps/.../linux > it should not worry about __SYS_*). Ahh, you meant sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux, I thought you meant sysdeps/unix. Yes, that makes sense. Can you please post that on the list for review? > Second one is the __access_errno implementation. It basically handles > the 3 cases (hurd, nacl, and Linux) by adding the __access_errno on > access.c. > > I think it should a cleaner solution to __access_noerro (less macro > handling and build objects). Sure, I don't mind this kind of implementation either. Do you want to post this one for review too? Thanks, Siddhesh