Re: [PATCH] alternative to sys_indirect, part 1

[H. Peter Anvin]

Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> On 4/24/08, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > But this approach fixes just one of the interfaces.  There are 7 or 8
> >  > other interfaces that need to solve the same problem.  What about
> >  > those?
> >
> >
> > Actually it seems to fix most of them.
>
> Am I missingg something?  How?  There a number of system calls that
> have neither a flags argument, nor another argument that we can
> overload (as you propose with socket()).  For those, we'd need new
> system calls os sys_indirect().

sys_indirect is a total red herring here, since it won't help one iota 
making the userspace interface comprehensible - it just introduces a 
different calling convention that the C library will have to thunk.

	-hpa
--
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/