Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:20:42 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] alternative to sys_indirect, part 1 |
| |
Michael Kerrisk wrote: > On 4/24/08, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> 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
| |