sys_indirect or many syscalls?

[Ulrich Drepper]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Linux,

will you please make a decision regarding sys_indirect?  There has been
no other proposal so the alternative is to add more syscalls.

This really is a problem.  For one instance, see

  http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443321

The problem is actually a socket call and we cannot reliably set the
CLOEXEC bit without massive program slowdowns.  This is just one example.

I still think the sys_indirect method is the best since it avoids bloat
in the number of system calls.

- --
â Ulrich Drepper â Red Hat, Inc. â 444 Castro St â Mountain View, CA â
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkgMM+IACgkQ2ijCOnn/RHRwiQCfXzlb3ihLjJTfgEXIK9BObyvx
H6oAoJBRj4c8lfePA8+GWzRzJXSdss95
=pnY+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
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/