[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140213224149.GA5783@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 17:41:49 -0500
From: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, rdunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] sys_sysfs: Add CONFIG_SYSFS_SYSCALL
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 02:38:32PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 05:31:41PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:09:42PM +0800, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> > > sys_sysfs is an obsolete system call no longer supported by libc ...
> > > -This patch adds a default CONFIG_SYSFS_SYSCALL=y
> > > -Option can be turned off in expert mode.
> > > -cond_syscall added to kernel/sys_ni.c
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>
> > > ---
> > > fs/filesystems.c | 2 ++
> > > init/Kconfig | 10 ++++++++++
> > > kernel/sys_ni.c | 1 +
> > > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+)
> >
> > did anyone ever ship userspace that actually used that syscall ?
> > Some ancient version of udev that probably doesn't work on a modern kernel anyway maybe ?
>
> sys_sysfs doesn't have anything to do with /sys/ and udev in any way
> that I know of, it's a much older thing, a sysv syscall that can return
> the index, name, or max index of a filesystem.
>
> And yes, I got confused by it all the time when creating sysfs :)
ah, Now I realise I've also made this mistake before. Tricky.
I wonder if anything does still use it though..
*goes to grep all of Fedora source*
Dave
--
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