Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 18:16:35 +0200 From: Dirk GOUDERS <gouders@et.bocholt.fh-ge.de> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, Sergey Uvarov <uvarovsl@mail.pnpi.spb.ru> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: preferable way to control kernel module Message-ID: <200508111616.j7BGGZWG055221@sora.hank.home> In-Reply-To: Message from John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> of "Thu, 11 Aug 2005 11:22:38 EDT." <200508111122.39336.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Thank you for advise. But I wonder: what is wrong with syscall approach > > (via SYSCALL_MODULE macro)? > > I just haven't done one personally. I think there's also a lot more potenti > al > for collisions when trying to pick a syscall number versus picking a string > name for a sysctl or /dev entry. Shouldn't that be no problem if he sets the offset parameter to SYSCALL_MODULE to NO_SYSCALL (get the next free offset)? Dirk
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200508111616.j7BGGZWG055221>