From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, sam@ravnborg.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: missing syscalls
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 14:44:10 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070401204410.GC826@parisc-linux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070401.131619.94554745.davem@davemloft.net>
On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 01:16:19PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
> Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 14:09:47 -0600
>
> > I haven't looked at the missing syscall check implementation, but it seems
> > like it's poorly designed if we have to add ifdefs for each arch. Why not
> > allow arches a mechanism to state which syscalls they intentionally
> > don't implement?
>
> The whole idea is for the arch's to just find out that a new syscall
> exists when someone adds a new one and some tries a build on that
> platform the next time. If the arch's still have to do work then the
> whole exercise is pointless.
By and large, the missing syscalls are older ones, eg socketcall or
utime, and they tend to be missing for good reason. I think it's
entirely appropriate that the arch has to do work when a new syscall is
added -- either implement it, or state that it's not supposed to be
implemented.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-01 20:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-01 16:01 missing syscalls Sam Ravnborg
2007-04-01 19:15 ` Russell King
2007-04-01 19:23 ` David Miller
2007-04-01 20:09 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-04-01 20:16 ` David Miller
2007-04-01 20:44 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2007-04-01 20:19 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-04-01 21:32 ` Russell King
2007-04-01 23:12 ` Arnd Bergmann
2007-04-01 19:23 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-04-01 21:33 ` Russell King
2007-04-01 20:54 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-01 21:10 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-04-02 5:58 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-02 12:31 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-04-12 20:51 ` David Miller
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=20070401204410.GC826@parisc-linux.org \
--to=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.