Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21

[David Woodhouse]

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/