lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [May]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: The disappearing sys_call_table export.

On 05.08, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 10:10:21PM +0300, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> > Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > >Maybe you have a different notion of proper mechanism then everyone
> > >else.
> > >
> > Out of personal interest - would a mechanism that promised the following
> > be considered a "proper mechanism"?
> > 1. Work on all platforms.
> > 2. Allow load and unload in arbitrary order and timings (which also
> > means "be race free").
> > 3. Have low/zero overhead if not used
>
> No, the most important point is that a proper meachanism wouldn't
> replace syscall slots but rather operate on kernel objects (file, inode
> vma, task_struct, etc..). Linus has expressed a few times that
> he has no interest in loadable syscalls and any core developer I've
> talked to agrees with that.
>

Don't have followed the whole thread, so I don't know if somebody has already
said this, but all this thing about hooks looks perfect for projects like
bproc or mosix, have you talked to them ?
(perhaps Erik Hendriks <erik@hendriks.cx> -bproc- is following the thread...;) )

--
J.A. Magallon <jamagallon@able.es> \ Software is like sex:
werewolf.able.es \ It's better when it's free
Mandrake Linux release 9.2 (Cooker) for i586
Linux 2.4.21-rc1-jam2 (gcc 3.2.2 (Mandrake Linux 9.2 3.2.2-5mdk))
-
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 13:35    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans