This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Consensus around kernel syscall wrappers?
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>, Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 15:33:32 +0000
- Subject: Re: Consensus around kernel syscall wrappers?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <55CCF8C6 dot 3060007 at redhat dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1508132025440 dot 7713 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <55CDF7A4 dot 50905 at redhat dot com>
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> (a) All Linux syscalls that are considered useful for the OS-independent
> GNU API should be added immediately.
With documentation and testcases, and consensus is needed in each case on
the header that has the declaration, the types involved, conventions for
errno / cancellation, etc.
> (b) All Linux syscalls that are not considered useful for the OS-independent
> GNU API should be added to an AS_NEEDED library named appropriately
> e.g. libinux-syscalls.so.N, where this library is part of the implementation
> and must be updated in lock-step with the implementation to ensure that
> cancellation and other things are kept synchronized. It should not be a static
> library to avoid security issues and to allow it to be updated.
With the same requirements as above on documentation, testcases etc.,
though there might be a bit more of a case here for the documentation just
saying it calls a particular Linux syscall and giving the types / error
handling / cancellation information.
(The absolute minimum for a testcase verifies that a call compiles and
links. Cf. <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2013-07/msg00386.html>
regarding existing interfaces that aren't even tested to that minimal
Joseph S. Myers