Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:18:43 -0700 | From | Ulrich Drepper <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] alternative to sys_indirect, part 1 |
| |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Alan Cox wrote: > Given we will never have 2^32 socket types, and in a sense this is part > of the type why not just use > > socket(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM|SOCK_CLOEXEC, ...) > > that would be far far cleaner, no new syscalls on the socket side at all.
You have a strange sense of "clean" I must say.
I don't think this is a viable approach because it is not about the range. People can and do select arbitrary values for those types. Until a value is officially recognized and registered it is in fact best to choose a (possibly large) random value to not conflict with anything else. Who can guarantee that whatever bit is chosen for SOCK_CLOEXEC isn't already used by someone?
Add to this that it's not a complete solution (no such hack possible for accept) and I think using a new interface is cleaner(tm).
- -- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFIEJbD2ijCOnn/RHQRAnUBAKDFxC7Xkl8Qlo5u7PS8XBx4WrNzRQCgm2Ic mV6zeglZaTJMn3IuGv3tB60= =06jC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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/
| |