[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180316111304.GA5302@light.dominikbrodowski.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 12:13:04 +0100
From: Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, luto@...nel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arnd@...db.de,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/36] x86/ioport: add ksys_ioperm() helper; remove
in-kernel calls to sys_ioperm()
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 01:43:08AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 08:05:06PM +0100, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> > Using this helper allows us to avoid the in-kernel calls to the sys_ioperm()
> > syscall.
>
> Why not do_ioperm or kernel_ioperm as for most other syscalls?
The newly introduced ksys_*() functions/helpers/wrappers take the same
parameters and use the same calling conventions as the "real" syscalls, and
are made available through include/linux/syscalls.h for (at least temporary)
in-kernel use.
Contrary to that, do_*() are mostly kept internal to one file or subsystem,
and seem to be more flexible with the calling convention. Same for
kernel_*().
But if you prefer the do_*() or kernel_*() namespace for the
in-kernel-syscall-equivalent for fs/*, I'm fine with that, just let me know.
Thanks,
Dominik
Powered by blists - more mailing lists