From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
rddunlap@osdl.org, davidm@hpl.hp.com, fastboot@lists.osdl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drepper@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Fastboot] Re: [announce] kexec for linux 2.6.6
Date: 13 May 2004 00:06:08 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1lljwsvxr.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040513053051.A5286@infradead.org>
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> writes:
> On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 04:16:03PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > But if we need additional infrastructure to "add new syscalls via VDSO" then
> > this should be in the base kernel, even if it's empty, yes?
>
> Linus has vetoed dynamic syscall registration a few times. And I agree
> with him, dynamic syscalls are the best way to get completely crappy
> interfaces.
The only thing I was thinking of doing was to export the symbol
__kernel__NR_kexec_load. With a little care we could probably export
the system call numbers just as easily from /proc/kallsyms.
At this point that idea seems to add no real benefit. Except for
allowing for a user space that can more easily track syscall renumber in
the kernel, which seems to be the wrong problem to solve.
So if kexec could actually get a reserved system call number that
would be the best solution I have seen in this thread.
Andrew how close are we to a point where we can look at kexec inclusion?
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-13 6:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-05-12 4:26 Randy.Dunlap
2004-05-12 5:00 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-05-12 6:18 ` [Fastboot] " Eric W. Biederman
2004-05-12 15:33 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-05-12 15:54 ` Eric W. Biederman
2004-05-12 16:31 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-05-12 16:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2004-05-12 21:32 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-05-12 22:08 ` David Mosberger
2004-05-12 22:28 ` Andrew Morton
2004-05-12 22:33 ` David Mosberger
2004-05-12 23:16 ` Andrew Morton
2004-05-12 23:27 ` David Mosberger
2004-05-13 4:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-05-13 5:05 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-05-13 5:21 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-05-13 5:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-05-13 6:06 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2004-05-13 6:20 ` Andrew Morton
2004-05-13 6:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
2004-05-13 7:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-05-13 7:37 ` Andrew Morton
2004-05-13 7:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-05-13 8:04 ` Andrew Morton
2004-05-13 13:52 ` Eric W. Biederman
2004-05-13 15:02 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-05-14 5:21 ` Eric W. Biederman
2004-05-14 18:14 ` Adam Litke
2004-05-15 2:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2004-05-17 0:49 ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-05-12 5:05 ` [Fastboot] " Eric W. Biederman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m1lljwsvxr.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=davidm@hpl.hp.com \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=fastboot@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rddunlap@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®