Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:16:07 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Dirk GOUDERS <gouders@et.bocholt.fh-ge.de> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Sergey Uvarov <uvarovsl@mail.pnpi.spb.ru> Subject: Re: preferable way to control kernel module Message-ID: <42FBC017.6050000@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <200508111813.j7BIDeFP055360@sora.hank.home>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Dirk GOUDERS wrote: > > >>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) In the past, I've used a sysctl to communicate out the syscall number. you only need to do the syscall once, and it confirms to the program that the syscall is correctly installed.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42FBC017.6050000>