Re: [patch] Assigning syscall numbers for testing

[Andreas Steinmetz <ast@domdv.de>]

On 24-Dec-2001 Edgar Toernig wrote:
> Russell King wrote:
>> 
>> On Mon, Dec 24, 2001 at 07:05:31PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>> > > it.  However, I think it needs to be allocated *regardless* of whether
>> > > Linus
>> > > takes the patch into his kernel.  Even if the patch is simply used
>> > > outside
>> > > Linus's kernel, it still needs the allocation to truly be safe.
>> >
>> > Negative numbers are safe until Linus has 2^31 syscalls, at which point
>> > quite frankly we would have a few other problems including the fact that
>> > the syscall table won't fit in kernel mapped memory.
>> 
>> Please leave the allocation of the exact number space to the port
>> maintainers discression.
> 
> Why not assign 1 syscall that gets the name of an experimental syscall
> as its first argument and does the demultiplexing?
> 

Please, no multiplexing. A well defined range (small as it may be) open to
developers (and thus collision) will do.

> Ciao, ET.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

Andreas Steinmetz
D.O.M. Datenverarbeitung GmbH