On Saturday 19 August 2006 10:42, Russell King wrote:
> Maybe what we should be thinking of doing is changing execve() calls
> to kernel_execve() which returns the error code.
>
> This way, architectures are free to implement execve() whatever way
> they wish - and if they're concerned about using errno, that's their
> own implementation specific detail.
Sounds good, it means we could finally kill __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__ along
with lib/errno.c.
I guess a fallback for those that haven't yet done kernel_execve could be
#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_KERNEL_EXECVE
extern int kernel_execve(const char *filename,
char *const argv[], char *const envp[]);
#else
static inline int kernel_execve(const char *filename,
char *const argv[], char *const envp[]);
{
int errno;
mm_segment_t old_fs = get_fs();
set_fs(KERNEL_DS);
/* the kernel syscall macro modifies errno */
execve(filename, argv, envp);
set_fs(old_fs);
return errno;
}
#endif
With that in place, we can remove the global errno right away, and the
kernel syscalls for any architecture that implements its own kernel_execve.
Arnd <><
-
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]