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]
    ©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean