Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [RFC] Wine speedup & "dynamic system calls are not going to happen." | Date | Mon, 18 Sep 2000 13:21:49 +0100 | From | David Howells <> |
| |
torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds) wrote: > David Howells <David.Howells@nexor.co.uk> wrote: > > > >Oliver Neukum <Oliver.Neukum@lrz.uni-muenchen.de> wrote: > >> > (3) Even if it was... just filling in the syscall slot from a module means > >> > that it is possible for the module to be unloaded whilst the syscall is in > >> > use. > > Note that all this is not the problem. > > The problem is that dynamic system calls are not going to happen. > > License issues. I will not allow system calls to be added from modules. > Because I do not think that adding a system call is a valid thing for a > module to do. It's that easy. > > It's the old thing about "hooks". You must not sidestep the GPL by just > putting a hook in place. And dynamic system calls are the ultimate hook.
What about nfsd's "nfsservctl" syscall then? This appears to be modulable...
Anyway, I didn't mean using a random syscall number provided by the kernel upon loading the module, but having one number preallocated for the purpose as is done in knfsd.
Do you think, then, that I should be putting my stuff up for inclusion in the kernel proper (say v2.5)? Or do you think I shouldn't be using a syscall at all? Or should I just be offering it as a kernel patch that has to be applied for use?
David Howells
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |