On Wednesday 23 April 2008, Will Newton wrote: > I implemented the approach you suggested - Kconfig symbol and > cond_syscall definition. I think I actually like the previous approach > better: > > 1. The arch Kconfig files are quite non-uniform compared to unistd.h > so the definitions wind up at different places in the file which is a > bit messy. > 2. Changes to Kconfig may cause churn in defconfigs perhaps? > 3. There is more churn in arch Kconfig than unistd.h so getting a > cross arch patch applied is likely to be more difficult. > 4. The patch is about 4 times as many lines. > > What do you think? I still feel that the original patch was more helpful and consistent with how we do it for the existing obsolete syscalls. Note that there is a much simpler solution if you just use an "#ifdef __NR_sys_sysfs" around the definition of the syscall, but that has another disadvantage in that it is harder to spot when new architectures get it wrong. Arnd <>< -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
