Re: sys_recvmmsg: wire up or not?

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

> It's also rather inconsistent with the last socket call that was added, sys_accept4.
> Some architectures that normally define socket calls (parisc, sh) are missing both
> accept4 and recvmmsg, while others that don't have recvmsg now get recvmmsg.
> 
> In particular, i386 has recvmmsg now, which caused the warning that you saw.
> I guess that one should be removed, and maybe we need a better logic for
> determining which syscalls you actually want. Deriving it from asm-generic/unistd.h
> instead of arch/x86/include/asm/unistd_32.h is probably better, but would still
> give the wrong answer for multiplexed system calls like socketcall or ipc on 
> existing architectures.

Anything happening here ? We're getting that warning on ppc too despite
the fact that we use socketcall like x86... Should checksyscall be made
smarter or the syscall just removed from x86 ? :-)

Cheers,
Ben.


--
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/