[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#647825: udevd[XXX]: unable to receive ctrl connection: Function not implemented



On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 16:01 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 16:35 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > clone 647825 -1
> > block 647825 by -1
> > thanks
> > 
> > On Nov 10, Émeric Maschino <emeric.maschino@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Well, it seems that the problem isn't in fact that SOCK_CLOEXEC isn't
> > > implemented on ia64, but simply that sys_accept4() isn't implemented,
> > > right?
> > Right.
> > But I do not understand why nobody else noticed this, unless you are the
> > first person to install wheezy on ia64.
> 
> That seems entirely plausible.
>
> > > Is it thus a kernel-related issued rather than an udev one?
> > Other architectures have it and I am not going to revert this change
> > again, so this will have to be fixed in the kernel.
> > I would like to know from the kernel people which conflicts I need to
> > add to the udev package.
> 
> Don't bother; there's no reasonable way to write conflicts against
> kernel versions.  We can backport sys_accept4 plumbing for ia64 to
> squeeze if necessary, like we did for armel (#625752).

I think we need this, which applies cleanly to the current kernel
version in squeeze:

commit 9ab87644393d789b950ba984fa360f45c4df02e5
Author: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Date:   Thu Dec 10 22:10:31 2009 +0100

    asm-generic: add sys_accept4 to unistd.h

Can someone test that the attached patch is sufficient to make the new
udev work on ia64?  (See the instructions at
<kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html#s-common-official>.)

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
You can't have everything.  Where would you put it?
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:10:31 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] asm-generic: add sys_accept4 to unistd.h

commit 9ab87644393d789b950ba984fa360f45c4df02e5 upstream.

Code review has shown that the generic version of
unistd.h is missing a reference to the accept4
system call. This was not noticed before because
most architectures handle this through sys_socketcall.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
 include/asm-generic/unistd.h |    4 +++-
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/asm-generic/unistd.h b/include/asm-generic/unistd.h
index 2869650..c5545da 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/unistd.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/unistd.h
@@ -622,9 +622,11 @@ __SYSCALL(__NR_move_pages, sys_move_pages)
 __SYSCALL(__NR_rt_tgsigqueueinfo, sys_rt_tgsigqueueinfo)
 #define __NR_perf_event_open 241
 __SYSCALL(__NR_perf_event_open, sys_perf_event_open)
+#define __NR_accept4 242
+__SYSCALL(__NR_accept4, sys_accept4)
 
 #undef __NR_syscalls
-#define __NR_syscalls 242
+#define __NR_syscalls 243
 
 /*
  * All syscalls below here should go away really,
-- 
1.7.7.2

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: