Messages in this thread | | | From | Keith Owens <> | Subject | Re: [patch] Assigning syscall numbers for testing | Date | Sun, 23 Dec 2001 16:10:21 +1100 |
| |
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 20:04:24 -0800 (PST), Chris Vandomelen <chrisv@b0rked.dhs.org> wrote: >> No, that's not the case I'm talking about: what happens when a vendor >> starts shipping this patch and Linus decides to add a new syscall that >> uses a syscall number that the old kernel used for dynamic syscalls? > >If I understood correctly, /proc/dynamic_syscalls contains the information >about dynamically registered syscall name->number associations, which are >placed beyond the end of the currently registered set of syscalls. Later >on down the line when we have 500 syscalls (exaggeration of course), the >patch should still work as intended by just telling it that the empty >slots in the syscall table begin at 501. So now your syscall that was >registered as syscall 241 with the dynamic syscall patch in 2.4.17 now >gets number 502 (or anything else for that matter) with the same patch >under 5.4.23. Whee.
I'm glad somebody understands the code :).
- 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/
| |