[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56D4B63D.1010202@nathan7.eu>
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 22:21:01 +0100
From: Nathan Zadoks <nathan@...han7.eu>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add sched_getcpu
No objections have been noted previously, and in addition this has a
vDSO equivalent on on x86_64, x32, and 64-bit ppc kernels. I haven't
added support for that yet, but I'm hoping to make that my next patch if
this gets merged.
Shoving the raw syscall into every app seems unproductive, and adding
vDSO handling to random userland apps seems especially odd.
I *started* this patch because a patch of mine to support musl in an
application was denied, on grounds of the syscall handling belonging in
libc.
On 29/02/16 22:09, Tomasz Sterna wrote:
> W dniu 29.02.2016, pon o godzinie 17∶49 +0100, użytkownik Nathan Zadoks
> napisał:
>> This is a GNU extension, but a fairly minor one, for a system call
>> that otherwise has no libc wrapper.
> Does it need a libc wrapper?
> Calling it using syscall() seems pretty straightforward.
>
> There are a lot of Linux specific syscalls without libc wrappers.
> Is this one special enough?
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
