On Mon, 2 Jul 2007, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> On 7/1/07, Davide Libenzi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > With the current API design you'd able to easily confine the "pre" code
> > inside the "set" function, and the "post" code inside the "unset"
> > function. It looks pretty clean to me, and allows to limit the knowledge
> > of sys_indirect, the more as possible inside kernel/indirect.c.
>
> But this will not be applicable. We already discussed that each
> syscall likely needs its own set of flags etc. There really isn't
> much overlap if any which cannot be handled at least as well using a
> flat structure. You're adding major complications for something which
> IMO will never be usable. With the flat structure to whole overhead
> of sys_indirect is limited to a test for valid syscalls, copying the
> struct, making the call to the syscall function, and resetting the
> value in current. Very simple and fast.
Never be usable? I made you a concrete example that is like 8 months old.
And *that* could not have been cleanly handled with the flat structure
idea.
The extra flags parameter is one example where we'd need an extra flags
field in the task_struct in any case. So you need in any case code that
does extra checks and merges normal parameters/flags with the shared
context ones. This independently of the method used. But there are
examples (and the signal stuff is one of them), where you do need the
set_context+syscall+unset_context abstraction, for all cases where the
kernel already has its own internal data strctures. In those cases you'd
have to spread sys_internal context knowledge all around the kernel,
whereas the current solution allows you to confine the code inside
kernel/indirect.c (through the set/unset abstraction). And this w/out even
try to hit the weak spot of about how this structure will look after a few
additions.
- Davide
-
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]
