On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 11:00 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 10:53 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > > /usr/include/linux is _not_ a place to dump "reference code" in lieu of
> > > documentation on using kernel interfaces.
> >
> > At least for the system call interface it was always. It is not
> > my fault you're trying to suddenly redefine it to be something else.
>
> I'm trying to 'suddenly redefine' kernel headers as something that
> _isn't_ just a library of random crap for people to abuse in userspace
> as they see fit, then whine when something breaks even though it was
> never really guaranteed to work when abused in that way anyway.
>
> So far, you're just reminding me why that needed to be done.
>
> > > Besides, the _syscallX implementations in the kernel were generally
> > > unsuitable for use [as a reference implementation]
> >
> > I disagree. I used them and they worked great for me.
the x86_64 macros use the VDSO page? great! I didn't know that.
But that would make them unusable for kernel use I suspect...
--
if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com
-
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]
