On Son, 2011-03-20 at 13:08 +0530, mohit verma wrote: [...]
I think it should be there in kernel not because it is my idea but for good reasons (personally think so).
... and despite IMHO good reason for not including. But talk is cheap so prepare and propose a working prototype as patch and we will see the reaction from others. I'm not strong against it but I do not see any significant advantage but at least one open question and the burden to all which do not need/use it[0]. ad "POSIX compliance": Well, there are lots of system calls (in the Linux kernel) which are not in POSIX (or SuSv3 or ...) - plain simply because they are newer than these "standards" or out of the scope of them. And (on Linux with and/or without GNU-libc) some system-calls (or whatever POSIX calls them) are "only" libc functions which are transformed into other, real existing system-calls. Bernd [0]: And that is partly due to my embedded background where you strive to make everything small and avoid bloat;-) -- Bernd Petrovitsch Email : bernd@petrovitsch.priv.at LUGA : http://www.luga.at