Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__ | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:29:02 +1000 |
| |
On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 17:12 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 21 August 2006 02:36, Paul Mackerras wrote: > > > Iit turned out most of the architectures that already implement > > > their own execve() call instead of using the _syscall3 function > > > for it end up passing the return value of sys_execve down, > > > instead of setting errno. > > > > I really don't like having an "errno" variable in the kernel. What if > > two processes are doing an execve concurrently? > > The point is that we have two different schemes in the kernel that > conflict: > > alpha, arm{,26}, ia64, parisc, powerpc and x86_64 pass the error > code from execve, all others pass -1 and set the global errno.
All other need to be fixed then... having an errno is just plain wrong.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |