Oliver Neukum <Oliver.Neukum@lrz.uni-muenchen.de> wrote:
> > I think now that I'm probably best providing a generic pluggable syscall
> > handler, one that is very careful to make sure the syscall can't be entered
> > whilst the module is being unloaded.
>
> This seems to me the best idea. However I would argue against dynamically
> allocating syscalls. Reserving numbers makes for better code and allows you
> to do autoloading.
Now there's an idea... have the kernel autoload modules based on a particular
syscall number being handled in that module. Madness *grin*.
You still have to have a static syscall number though...
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 15 2000 - 21:00:17 EST