From: Chase Venters <chase.venters@clientec.com>
Organization: Clientec, Inc.
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:32:39 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.4
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
       =?iso-8859-1?q?Bj=F6rn_Steinbrink?= <B.Steinbrink@gmx.de>,
       Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>, rusty@rustcorp.com.au,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
References: <20060819073031.GA25711@atjola.homenet> <200608201237.13194.chase.venters@clientec.com> <20060820112523.f14fc6dc.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060820112523.f14fc6dc.akpm@osdl.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200608201333.02951.chase.venters@clientec.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 966
Lines: 25

On Sunday 20 August 2006 13:25, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 12:36:49 -0500
>
> Chase Venters <chase.venters@clientec.com> wrote:
> > Unless 'errno' has some significant reason to live on in the kernel, I
> > think it would be better to kill it and write kernel syscall macros that
> > don't muck with it.
>
> We have been working in that direction.  It's certainly something we'd like
> to kill off.

Perhaps Arnd's patch is a good step in that direction then. A secondary 
suggestion is to put a big comment there that explains "Yes, we know this is 
ugly, it's going to die soon."

I'd also consider going so far as just returning -1 if we failed, since we 
can't quite trust errno anyway.

Thanks,
Chase
-
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/