On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 01:07:41AM -0800, Amit Choudhary wrote:
> Now, let's say a vendor has linux_kernel_version_1 that has 300
> system calls. The vendor needs to give some extra functionality to
> its customers and the way chosen is to implement new system call.
> The new system call number is
On Jan 7 2007 01:07, Amit Choudhary wrote:
>
>I will come to the main issue later but I just wanted to point out
>that we maintain information at two separate places - mapping
>between the name and the number in user space and kernel space.
>Shouldn't this duplication be removed.
For example? Do
On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 00:15 -0800, Amit Choudhary wrote:
> 1. Invoke a system call using its name. Pass its name to the kernel as an
> argument of syscall() or
> some other function. Probably may make the invocation of the system call
> slower. If the name
> doesn't match in the kernel then an er
On 01/07/2007 10:07 AM, Amit Choudhary wrote:
However, people may say that, implementing custom system calls is not
advocated by linux. And I think it is not advocated precisely because
of this reason that they are not portable.
True I guess. But do you want to live in a software environment w
--- Rene Herman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>If we're limited to Linux kernels, this seems to not be the case. Great care
>is taken in keeping
>this userspace ABI stable -- new system calls are given new numbers. Old
>system calls may
>disappear (after a long grace period) but even then I don't
On 01/07/2007 09:15 AM, Amit Choudhary wrote:
Well, system calls today are not portable mainly because they are
invoked using a number and it may happen that a number 'N' may refer
to systemcall_1() on one system/kernel and to systemcall_2() on
another system/kernel.
If we're limited to Linux
6 matches
Mail list logo