Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261411AbTEHNJa (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2003 09:09:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261450AbTEHNJ3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2003 09:09:29 -0400 Received: from pat.uio.no ([129.240.130.16]:13961 "EHLO pat.uio.no") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261411AbTEHNJZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2003 09:09:25 -0400 From: Terje Malmedal To: hch@infradead.org CC: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, terje.eggestad@scali.com, hch@infradead.org, arjanv@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, D.A.Fedorov@inp.nsk.su In-reply-to: <20030508132931.A4951@infradead.org> (message from Christoph Hellwig on Thu, 8 May 2003 13:29:31 +0100) Subject: Re: The disappearing sys_call_table export. MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 15:18:29 +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1669 Lines: 54 [Christoph Hellwig] > On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 02:25:51PM +0200, Terje Malmedal wrote: >> >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL_AND_DONT_EVEN_THINK_ABOUT_SENDING_A_BUG_REPORT(sys_call_table); >> >> and displaying a nasty warning message on the console whenever a >> module used it? > What about just adding the EXPORT_SYMBOL() yourself yo your kernels > if you think you need it so badly because you can't screw yourself > enough without it? And if I wish to help somebody running a kernel I didn't compile? Do you have anything constructive to say about situation i referred to: A database is starting to run slower and slower, turns out that this is because fsync() is inefficient on large files. Rebooting the server or restarting the database is undesirable even at night. ? I was able to fix this without rebooting or restarting the database. How do you propose to fix something similar today without having sys_call_table exported? Also what exactly is the badness people are complaining about, if I do: int init_module(void) { orig_fsync=sys_call_table[SYS_fsync]; sys_call_table[SYS_fsync]=hacked_fsync; return 0; } void cleanup_module(void) { sys_call_table[SYS_fsync]=orig_fsync; } The only problem I can see is that different modules overloading the same function needs to be unloaded in the correct order. Is this the only reason for removing it, or am I missing something? -- - Terje malmedal@usit.uio.no - 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/