-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David Miller wrote: > Since the valid range of "domain" values is quite small, > we could avoid the new system call by cribbing some of the > upper bits of the 'domain' argument. > > Valid existing programs pass in valid 'domain' values and > thus will not set any of the new flags.
I can see several problems with that: - - experimental implementers might choose domain values which definitely won't collide with others - - the flags parameter ideally allows using the same values used for open's mode argument. The lowest value I can see making sense is O_NONBLOCK (04000). - - how to recognize kernels without the support? -EAFNOSUPPORT can also with new kernels mean it's actually the domain which is wrong - - there might be new flags we want to use over time I would strongly argue that any change we're doing in this area at userlevel would involve a new interface. Programs also need new definitions from headers files. This means a recent enough glibc will be needed in any case. Unless programs use their own definitions in which case they might as well use the syscall() function. - -- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGZzvl2ijCOnn/RHQRAgV0AKDBDhqSQ/cs4qGYLKGL4dwzpFZ2zgCgl/qO oFKnQ2eRuiziRu/N5vwWCeM= =tttP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - 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/
