On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:17:24 +0100 (BST),
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>> The layout of the sys_call_table is totally architecture dependant. The
>> question to ask here is why do you need to use it? Modifying it to hook
>> into syscalls is frowned upon.
>
>And potentially unsafe (think about caching, and non atomic writes on
>some platforms)
Not forgetting architectures like PPC64 and IA64 that require a
different function pointer format when syscall code is in a module. A
simple replacement of a pointer in the syscall table will not work on
those architectures.
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 31 2001 - 21:00:31 EST