Jonathan Corbet wrote:

Heh, indeed.  But we do seem to have a recurring problem of people
wanting to extend sys_foo() beyond the confines of its original API.
I've observed a few ways of doing that:

 - create sys_foo2() (or sys_foo64(), or sys_fooat(), or sys_pfoo(),
   or...) and add the new stuff there.

The first approach has traditionally been the most popular.  If we have
a consensus that this is the way to extend system calls in the future,
it would be nice to set that down somewhere.  We could avoid a lot of
API blind alleys that way.


I would argue it is the right approach. It lets the kernel system call entry dispatch directly to the system call for the "new" case, and to a compatibility thunk for the "old" case. It has the following desirable properties:

- No overhead for the "new" case.
- Minimal overhead for the "old" case.
- Easily dealt with by tools like strace that examine system calls.

        -hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to