Re: makesyscalls (moving forward)

[Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost>]

On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 09:07:45PM +0000, David Holland wrote:
> It seems to me that all of the following is mechanical and should be
> automatically generated, beyond what makesyscalls already does:
>    - all the code that calls copyin/copyout

It is probably too early and I had too few coffee - but could
you point me at an example line of code that does copyin/copyout for
syscall args that you think should be replaced with automatically
generated code? How much of that generated code would be not from a verbatim
C block in the syscall description file?

>    - compat32 translation for all syscalls and all ioctls

Tricky, but maybe doable. Not sure it will work for all.

>    - compat_otheros translation as well

I have no idea how that would work (or what exactly you mean).

Rump and anything that needs to serialize/deserialize syscalls
are different beasts, and they could benefit from a common syscall "protocol" 
definition, and maybe in the end it could turn out that we do want to make
that description the master source of our own syscall definitions.

I have no idea how sanitizers fit in here.

Maybe start with the basics and explain things from ground up before diverging
into the hard issues (like the name and install location).

Martin