From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Aug 11 17:29:45 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3195B16A41F
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 11 Aug 2005 17:29:45 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from mv.twc.weather.com (mv.twc.weather.com [65.212.71.225])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF78043D45
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 11 Aug 2005 17:29:44 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from [10.50.40.201] (Not Verified[65.202.103.25]) by
	mv.twc.weather.com with NetIQ MailMarshal (v6, 0, 3, 8)
	id <B42fb8e6a0000>; Thu, 11 Aug 2005 13:44:10 -0400
From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To: Dirk GOUDERS <gouders@et.bocholt.fh-ge.de>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 13:29:41 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.8
References: <200508111616.j7BGGZWG055221@sora.hank.home>
In-Reply-To: <200508111616.j7BGGZWG055221@sora.hank.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-6"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200508111329.42154.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Sergey Uvarov <uvarovsl@mail.pnpi.spb.ru>
Subject: Re: preferable way to control kernel module
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 17:29:45 -0000

On Thursday 11 August 2005 12:16 pm, Dirk GOUDERS wrote:
>  > > 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)?

But then you have to communicate the syscall number out to your userland 
applications somehow, and the applications have to know how to invoke a 
syscall by hand (perhaps they could use the syscall() function, but still).

-- 
John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve"  =  http://www.FreeBSD.org