Re: Syscall number allocation

From: H. Peter Anvin (hpa@zytor.com)
Date: Fri Jun 02 2000 - 21:19:27 EDT

  • Next message: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: Does /var/shm still need to be mounted?"

    Followup to: <ABSB4EvqkU@khim.sch57.msk.ru>
    By author: "Khimenko Victor" <khim@sch57.msk.ru>
    In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
    >
    > In <20000602164716.D2893@mclinux.com> Josh Huber (huber@missioncriticallinux.com) wrote:
    > > Is there some sort of precedent/procedure for reserving syscall table
    > > entries?
    >
    > Very few precedents. No procedure (not since nobody setuped web server
    > with database but since syscalls should not be added without deep need).
    > I can recall just one: streams syscalls. So it's
    > a) Possible (= was done at least once before)
    > b) Very hard (as there are VERY few such syscalls)
    >

    Actually, the "procedure" is to convince Linus to let you reserve a
    syscall number; he will put it in the kernel as unimplemented. It has
    been done, I belive, twice: once for afs and once for STREAMS.

            -hpa 

    -- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."

    -
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 02 2000 - 21:47:21 EDT