lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] alternative to sys_indirect, part 1
    > 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. I accept Jakub's observation we
    need a "paccept()" or similar.

    > It strikes me to be cleanest to use the same solution for all of them
    > -- i.e., new syscalls (seems simplest) or sys_indirect() -- including
    > socket().

    New syscalls make the interface more complex and harder to learn. They
    make it harder to tweak applications neatly to use the new API if
    present. They are not immediately obvious from knowling the existing API.

    What we don't want to do is to end up with a thousand weird system calls
    as Windows NT did where nobody can actually understand chunks of code
    without looking calls up in books as they go.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-04-24 18:13    [W:8.178 / U:0.028 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site