On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:14:17PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 11:38:02PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 04:56:24PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > > > Hey Andi, > > > > > > I'd like to push this page out the door, but I'm blocked doing so > > > until I hear back from you regarding the question below (plus a new > > > version of the page, if needed please). > > > > Probably. Eric should know. > > > > Frankly without an header the syscall is pretty much unusable > > for normal programs anyways, so I gave up on this. > > I'm not sure that I ever understood the impasse over the header. It's basically: should kexec_load only be used from kexec(8) or is it a generally available syscall. If the former is true no header or manpage is needed. For the later both are. -Andi -- ak at linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
