Re: [patch 0/6] sys_indirect RFC - sys_indirect introduction

[Davide Libenzi]

On Mon, 2 Jul 2007, Ulrich Drepper wrote:

> > But there are
> > examples (and the signal stuff is one of them), where you do need the
> > set_context+syscall+unset_context abstraction, for all cases where the
> > kernel already has its own internal data strctures. In those cases you'd
> > have to spread sys_internal context knowledge all around the kernel,
> > whereas the current solution allows you to confine the code inside
> > kernel/indirect.c
> 
> Nonsense.  Whether you have a new word in the task structure or a
> pointer to a structure, you have to embed knowledge of this
> indirection in every affected code paths.  There is no difference
> here.  The only difference is that trying to force everything through
> an artificially complicated common entry code.
> 
> I hope that Andrew+Linus will see through this.  I'm done arguing.

I simply asked you to look how the code/patch would look like to handle 
the ppoll/pselect/epoll_pwait stuff, and precisely where your changes had 
to go. Or even in the exmaple Linus made of "make the fsuid/fsgid 
temporarily be my _real_ uid/gid for this single system call" for what it 
matters.



- Davide


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/