![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 04:10, mark manning wrote: > ok - according to unistd.h we now have exactly 256 syscalls allocated (unless im missing something). my code needs to be able to account for every single possible syscall and so i need to be able to store the syscall number in a standard way. not all syscalls are catered for on the outset by at any time the user can say "i need to use syscall x which takes y parameters" and the code will be able to take care of it. > > the problem is that i am currently reserving only 8 bits for the syscall number. this is ok for now but if we ever get another syscall its going to be unuseable by my existing code :) - should i be reserving 16 bits now in preperation for some new syscalls being added ? > - > 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/ > Hmm... dunno if you got this right. There are maximal 256 syscalls possible, and, right -- exactly this amount of syscalls is in the entrytable. But alotalotalot of them are defined as sys_ni_syscall (not yet implemented). I think there is still some space for enhancements. See arch/i386/kernel/entry.S. Regards Frank - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:25 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||