Re: The disappearing sys_call_table export.

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 10:10:21PM +0300, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 
> >Maybe you have a different notion of proper mechanism then everyone
> >else.
> >
> Out of personal interest - would a mechanism that promised the following 
> be considered a "proper mechanism"?
> 1. Work on all platforms.
> 2. Allow load and unload in arbitrary order and timings (which also 
> means "be race free").
> 3. Have low/zero overhead if not used

No, the most important point is that a proper meachanism wouldn't
replace syscall slots but rather operate on kernel objects (file, inode
vma, task_struct, etc..).  Linus has expressed a few times that
he has no interest in loadable syscalls and any core developer I've
talked to agrees with that.