linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH] Add key management syscalls to non-i386 archs

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH] Add key management syscalls to non-i386 archs
From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:56:25 +0200
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, discuss@x86-64.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@m17n.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-390@vm.marist.edu, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20041020150149.7be06d6d.davem@davemloft.net>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <3506.1098283455@redhat.com> <20041020150149.7be06d6d.davem@davemloft.net>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 03:01:49PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> 
> David, I applaud your effort to take care of this.
> However, this patch will conflict with what I've
> sent into Linus already for Sparc.  I also had to
> add the sys_altroot syscall entry as well.
> 
> I've mentioned several times that perhaps the best
> way to deal with this problem is to purposefully
> break the build of platforms when new system calls
> are added.
> 
> Simply adding a:
> 
> #error new syscall entries for X and Y needed
> 
> to include/asm-*/unistd.h would handle this just
> fine I think.

I don't think that's a good idea.  Normally new system calls 
are relatively obscure and the system works fine without them,
so urgent action is not needed.

And I think we can trust architecture maintainers to regularly
sync the system calls with i386.

-Andi

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>