Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 16 Sep 2002 18:48:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 16 Sep 2002 18:48:08 -0400 Received: from dell-paw-3.cambridge.redhat.com ([195.224.55.237]:14322 "EHLO passion.cambridge.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 16 Sep 2002 18:48:07 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 13/07/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 From: David Woodhouse X-Accept-Language: en_GB In-Reply-To: <20020916.142931.126209536.davem@redhat.com> References: <20020916.142931.126209536.davem@redhat.com> <20020916.125211.82482173.davem@redhat.com> To: "David S. Miller" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, todd-lkml@osogrande.com, hadi@cyberus.ca, tcw@tempest.prismnet.com, netdev@oss.sgi.com, pfeather@cs.unm.edu Subject: Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 23:53:00 +0100 Message-ID: <12116.1032216780@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 563 Lines: 18 davem@redhat.com said: > new system calls into the networking code > The system calls would go into the VFS, sys_receivefile is not > networking specific in any way shape or form. Er, surely the same goes for sys_sendfile? Why have a new system call rather than just swapping the 'in' and 'out' fds? -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/