Re: [PATCH] Read only syscall tables for x86_64 and i386

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Jeremy Maitin-Shepard wrote:

> It would probably be better implemented with a more generic mechanism,
> but I don't believe anyone is working on that now, so it looks like AFS
> will continue to use a special syscall.

We could put an #ifdef CONFIG_AFS into the syscall table definition?
That makes it explicit.


-
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/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Read only syscall tables for x86_64 and i386
  - From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Read only syscall tables for x86_64 and i386
  - From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>

References:
- [PATCH] Read only syscall tables for x86_64 and i386
  - From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Read only syscall tables for x86_64 and i386
  - From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: reiser4 plugins
Next by Date: Re: reiser4 plugins
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Read only syscall tables for x86_64 and i386
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Read only syscall tables for x86_64 and i386
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]