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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).