[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47431F54.9030302@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:54:28 -0800
From: Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: drepper@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets
David Miller wrote:
> From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 01:53:14 -0500
>
> FWIW, I think this indirect syscall stuff is the most ugly interface
> I've ever seen proposed for the kernel.
Well, there's no XML in /proc :) :).
But, yes, I agree that the internal code needs a lot more cleanup before
being considered for merging.
> And I agree with all of the objections raised by both H. Pater Anvin
> and Eric Dumazet.
I'm worried, too. Do we have a stronger alternative? I'm all ears,
this isn't really my area of expertise.
- z
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists