Re: Strange Linux behaviour with blocking syscalls and stop signals+SIGCONT

["Michael Kerrisk" <michael.kerrisk@gmx.net>]

Von: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>

> 
> > There must be some framework for changing the kernel ABI over time.
> > We can't remain forever stuck with an ABI behaviour because 
> > of the development model (i.e., no 2.7/2.8). 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> this has nothing to do with the development model. 

Doh!  yes, thanks for pointing that out.

> The userspace syscall
> ABI *has* to be stable. If we make a mistake that's a high price but we
> pay it. This fwiw is one of the reasons we are/should be very careful
> with adding system calls, and make sure the behavior is indeed right.
> It's also the reason we're not so happy about new ioctls; they're
> effectively mini-system calls with the same ABI issues, but just less
> controlled/reviewed/designed/visible.

Yes.  

There have been ABI changes in the past.  In the end, I assume 
it's a question of relative desirability ("how broken is existing 
behaviour"; or: "was that behaviour ever desirable/portable 
anyway?") versus relative likelihood of breaking applications.

Cheers,

Michael
-- 


Echte DSL-Flatrate dauerhaft für 0,- Euro*!
"Feel free" mit GMX DSL! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/