Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21 | From | David Woodhouse <> | Date | Fri, 09 Feb 2007 22:12:27 +0000 |
| |
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/
|  |