From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@gmail.com>, Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>,
dragoran <dragoran@feuerpokemon.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 00:37:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200605220037.58286.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060521222831.GP8250@redhat.com>
On Monday 22 May 2006 00:28, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 12:19:08AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > > > You make a good point. In fact, given it's unthrottled, someone
> > > > with too much time on their hands could easily fill up a /var
> > > > just by calling unimplemented syscalls this way.
> >
> > I never bought this argument because there are tons of printks in the kernel
> > that can be triggered by everybody.
>
> Then they should also be either rate limited, or removed.
Yes let's remove all that kernel debugging support. It is totally useless
for most users, isn't it?
Even if they are ratelimit you can still fill up /var.
>
> > > Actually it is kinda throttled, but only on process name.
> > > This patch just removes that stuff completely.
> > > (Also removes a bunch of trailing whitespace)
> >
> > FF tree already has a different solution.
>
> Adding a sysctl ? That seems way overkill to me.
> What practical purpose does that printk solve ?
Catching missing code in the compat layer.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-05-21 22:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-21 8:35 IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64 dragoran
2006-05-21 8:50 ` Chris Wedgwood
2006-05-21 9:06 ` dragoran
2006-05-21 9:11 ` Chris Wedgwood
2006-05-21 9:26 ` dragoran
2006-05-21 9:54 ` dragoran
2006-05-21 16:03 ` Dave Jones
2006-05-21 18:35 ` Ulrich Drepper
2006-05-21 18:50 ` Dave Jones
2006-05-21 18:56 ` Dave Jones
2006-05-21 19:38 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-05-21 19:47 ` Dave Jones
2006-05-22 0:17 ` [2.6 patch] x86_64: don't printk for unimplemented 32bit syscalls Adrian Bunk
2006-05-21 22:19 ` IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64 Andi Kleen
2006-05-21 22:28 ` Dave Jones
2006-05-21 22:37 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2006-05-21 23:48 ` Dave Jones
2006-05-21 23:51 ` Chris Wedgwood
2006-05-22 5:59 ` dragoran
2006-05-22 12:41 ` Dave Jones
2006-05-23 14:30 ` Denis Vlasenko
2006-05-21 23:09 ` Andrew Morton
2006-05-21 19:35 ` Chris Wedgwood
2006-05-21 19:38 ` Dave Jones
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=200605220037.58286.ak@suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=cw@f00f.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=dragoran@feuerpokemon.de \
--cc=drepper@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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