On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:35:35 +0000
David Woodhouse <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 15:07 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > lutimesat-simplify-utime2.patch
> > lutimesat-extend-do_utimes-with-flags.patch
> > lutimesat-actual-syscall-and-wire-up-on-i386.patch
> >
> > Do we want this? Ulrich says so. Will merge, I guess.
>
> I would strongly recommend that in the general case, you don't merge new
> system calls unless the corresponding compat_ system call is
> implemented.
Good point.
> This makes sure that people adding system calls will design the API for
> the new system call appropriately, rather than trying to implement
> compat support as an afterthought and only then realising that they wish
> the original had been done differently. We've seen examples of this
> where it would have been _trivial_ to adjust the API slightly to make
> compat syscalls a non-issue, but the developer just didn't _think_ about
> it until the syscall was set in stone.
>
> This new system call seems to need compat_ support but lacks it, so I
> would suggest you shouldn't merge it just yet.
OK, thanks.
-
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]
