Re: IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 5/21/06, Dave Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
It's a glibc problem really.
It's not a glibc problem really.  The problem is this stupid error
message in the kernel.  We rely in many dozens of places on the kernel
returning ENOSYS in case a syscall is not implemented and we deal with
it appropriately.  There is absolutely no justification to print these
messages except perhaps in debug kernels.  IMO the sys32_ni_syscall
functions should just return ENOSYS unless you select a special debug
kernel.  One doesn't need the kernel to detect missing syscall
implementations, strace can do this as well.
-
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/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux