This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH-for-2.21-and-2.22] s390-64: remove socketcall syscalls
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 22:10:04 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH-for-2.21-and-2.22] s390-64: remove socketcall syscalls
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1451010098-22120-1-git-send-email-aurelien at aurel32 dot net> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1512311816490 dot 15940 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <568A5A12 dot 1010509 at linaro dot org> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1601041537060 dot 24114 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
On 01/04/2016 10:39 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>> My view it was required back in time when compiler generated code for the
>> C inline calls was deficient (either by missing some argument constraints
>> like i386/arm or by due some performance issues), however currently I
>> see we should aim for only one definition: through C-code generated
>> syscalls (either by auto-generation from the syscalls.list or independent
>> C files).
> I'm fine with syscalls using generated C code.
> I think there was a suggestion in the past that the auto-generated
> syscalls ought to have debug information so you can see argument values
> when you interrupt a debugged program inside read or write or other
> syscalls. If it could be arranged for auto-generated syscalls to have
> correct argument types and meaningful names, generating them in C might
> help get such debug information, though I don't know how good it would be
> in practice.
I would also like SDT markers for entry to every syscall to assist in some
userspace tracing projects, and that would be easier in C.