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.
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 15 2003 - 22:00:28 EST