From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.osdl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Cedric Le Goater <clg@fr.ibm.com>,
drepper@redhat.com, Serge Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Extending syscalls
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:26:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <478FABDF.1020002@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <25712.1200582125@vena.lwn.net>
Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>
> Heh, indeed. But we do seem to have a recurring problem of people
> wanting to extend sys_foo() beyond the confines of its original API.
> I've observed a few ways of doing that:
>
> - create sys_foo2() (or sys_foo64(), or sys_fooat(), or sys_pfoo(),
> or...) and add the new stuff there.
>
> The first approach has traditionally been the most popular. If we have
> a consensus that this is the way to extend system calls in the future,
> it would be nice to set that down somewhere. We could avoid a lot of
> API blind alleys that way.
>
I would argue it is the right approach. It lets the kernel system call
entry dispatch directly to the system call for the "new" case, and to a
compatibility thunk for the "old" case. It has the following desirable
properties:
- No overhead for the "new" case.
- Minimal overhead for the "old" case.
- Easily dealt with by tools like strace that examine system calls.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-17 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-16 12:58 [PATCH 1/2] Extend sys_clone and sys_unshare system calls API Pavel Emelyanov
2008-01-16 13:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] Propagate the long_clone_arg up to the create_new_namespaces Pavel Emelyanov
2008-01-16 14:23 ` [PATCH 1/2] Extend sys_clone and sys_unshare system calls API Jonathan Corbet
2008-01-16 15:05 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2008-01-17 3:48 ` Al Viro
2008-01-17 9:28 ` Cedric Le Goater
2008-01-17 15:02 ` Extending syscalls (was: [PATCH 1/2] Extend sys_clone and sys_unshare system calls API) Jonathan Corbet
2008-01-17 19:26 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2008-01-23 20:59 ` [PATCH 1/2] Extend sys_clone and sys_unshare system calls API Pavel Machek
2008-01-24 17:09 ` Cedric Le Goater
2008-01-24 17:24 ` Dave Hansen
2008-01-24 17:37 ` Pavel Machek
2008-01-24 17:46 ` Dave Hansen
2008-01-24 17:50 ` Pavel Machek
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=478FABDF.1020002@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=clg@fr.ibm.com \
--cc=containers@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--cc=xemul@openvz.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