Subject: sys_indirect or many syscalls?
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.kernel
Date: 2008-04-21 06:27:46 GMT (1 year, 10 weeks, 5 days, 4 hours and 30 minutes ago)
Linux, will you please make a decision regarding sys_indirect? There has been no other proposal so the alternative is to add more syscalls. This really is a problem. For one instance, see http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443321 The problem is actually a socket call and we cannot reliably set the CLOEXEC bit without massive program slowdowns. This is just one example. I still think the sys_indirect method is the best since it avoids bloat in the number of system calls. -- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖