Re: [PATCH] alternative to sys_indirect, part 1

[Ulrich Drepper]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Alan Cox wrote:
> Given we will never have 2^32 socket types, and in a sense this is part
> of the type why not just use
> 
> 	socket(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM|SOCK_CLOEXEC, ...)
> 
> that would be far far cleaner, no new syscalls on the socket side at all.

You have a strange sense of "clean" I must say.

I don't think this is a viable approach because it is not about the
range.  People can and do select arbitrary values for those types.
Until a value is officially recognized and registered it is in fact best
to choose a (possibly large) random value to not conflict with anything
else.  Who can guarantee that whatever bit is chosen for SOCK_CLOEXEC
isn't already used by someone?

Add to this that it's not a complete solution (no such hack possible for
accept) and I think using a new interface is cleaner(tm).

- --
â Ulrich Drepper â Red Hat, Inc. â 444 Castro St â Mountain View, CA â
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIEJbD2ijCOnn/RHQRAnUBAKDFxC7Xkl8Qlo5u7PS8XBx4WrNzRQCgm2Ic
mV6zeglZaTJMn3IuGv3tB60=
=06jC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/