lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21
    From
    Date
    On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 22:03 +0000, Russell King wrote:
    > > Is that actually written anywhere, and does anyone bother to check?
    >
    > Mostly mailing list archives I'd guess. As far as anyone bothering
    > to check, that's me when I'm aware of new syscalls... which typically
    > happens a long time after the syscalls have been introduced on x86
    > etc.

    I suspect we could do with a Documentation/syscalls.txt collecting such
    rules from various architectures.

    We could _also_ do with a way to warn about unimplemented syscalls on
    any given architecture. I'm thinking about something along the lines of
    a kernel/syscalls.c containing nothing but...

    #include <asm/unistd.h>

    #ifndef __NR_sys_foo
    #warning The sys_foo system call is not implemented on this architecture
    #endif

    Ideally, that wants to be auto-generated from the union of all
    <asm-*/unistd.h> files, but in practice I suspect we could do it just
    from <asm-i386/unistd.h>. Even I usually manage to add new syscalls on
    i386 after I've done PowerPC.

    --
    dwmw2

    -
    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: 2007-02-09 23:15    [W:0.022 / U:119.300 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site