From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bernd@petrovitsch.priv.at (Bernd Petrovitsch) Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:38:25 +0100 Subject: Common signal handler system call In-Reply-To: References: <1300534267.23326.10.camel@thorin> <1300571006.23326.18.camel@thorin> Message-ID: <1300703905.1454.41.camel@thorin> To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org List-Id: kernelnewbies.lists.kernelnewbies.org On Son, 2011-03-20 at 13:08 +0530, mohit verma wrote: [...] > I think it should be there in kernel not because it is my idea but for > good reasons (personally think so). ... and despite IMHO good reason for not including. But talk is cheap so prepare and propose a working prototype as patch and we will see the reaction from others. I'm not strong against it but I do not see any significant advantage but at least one open question and the burden to all which do not need/use it[0]. ad "POSIX compliance": Well, there are lots of system calls (in the Linux kernel) which are not in POSIX (or SuSv3 or ...) - plain simply because they are newer than these "standards" or out of the scope of them. And (on Linux with and/or without GNU-libc) some system-calls (or whatever POSIX calls them) are "only" libc functions which are transformed into other, real existing system-calls. Bernd [0]: And that is partly due to my embedded background where you strive to make everything small and avoid bloat;-) -- Bernd Petrovitsch Email : bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at LUGA : http://www.luga.at