From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: futex(2) man page update help request Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 10:13:57 +0200 Message-ID: <20140515081357.GC11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <537346E5.4050407@gmail.com> <5373D0CA.2050204@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9SzJfJEKNI6APITJ" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5373D0CA.2050204-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-man-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Carlos O'Donell Cc: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, Darren Hart , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Jakub Jelinek , "linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , lkml , Davidlohr Bueso , Arnd Bergmann , Steven Rostedt , Linux API List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org --9SzJfJEKNI6APITJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 04:23:38PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On 05/14/2014 03:03 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > >> However, unless I'm sorely mistaken, the larger problem is that glibc > >> removed the futex() call entirely, so these man pages don't describe > >=20 > > I don't think futex() ever was in glibc--that's by design, and > > completely understandable: no user-space application would want to > > directly use futex(). (BTW, I mispoke in my earlier mail when I said I > > wanted documentation suitable for "writers of library functions" -- I > > meant suitable for "writers of *C library*".) >=20 > I fully agree with Michael here. >=20 > The futex() syscall was never exposed to userspace specifically because > it was an interface we did not want to support forever with a stable ABI. > The futex() syscall is an implementation detail that is shared between > the kernel and the writers of core runtimes for Linux. That ship has sailed.. for one we must always support old glibc which uses the futex() syscall, and secondly there are known other programs that actually use the futex syscall. So that's really a non-argument, we're hard tied to the ABI. --9SzJfJEKNI6APITJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTdHdFAAoJEHZH4aRLwOS6FGIP/RnuUWGDKHSWd1/lb+o0HsfS fBsoln90G+VX0A/JNwuIZm0b4g75djllUBPKqskws2h8xhOA1Tq4C8W/aPQGkV/o +vRGFKUE0V/XYZ2eRvMq/TQBSWkVWzI7w+5rMwMYYEhzqux+KdEA5wqWf9APCbEW xMpVV7wXT8H+XPCE9YzEKKtFGhUUSPKAW80aXvkDKNtIf1vwOxD2n3/mS/ijMAgc /Djrh/KvIybyTX1JSankaQQwmOzEoXmwaD3afm9KhIMs+tITBYUfetpiamPMY+87 LV7vMQ5wFJaDI/5YDYpNabOiv7sSawb6kgt4iC6y0JgJdgyBoAYsXbozdUgdtDMs AudO5enG+qbWoCwfTACIO99LagE6LsGum9OBCRcwS1qEABuRqYHrWJQW8cp/R8LU 0y9FdWtbI3nFbFb0mJsyyONi7RQ4euSQg45CP7it9HXMAXQPa1BgnCBWurJxqvDe 2ZJuPSmHvHP0FiUxCkmrDBQKifU02cJIaKOtPpPhOICFlIwNLHLyAP3tisWW3fIc bAuyGbbuirnB+BrKU/8xEaOS3rJaCGZx5d1UuH08iwJI5zVmJt/o5cwppB+jmumB yoTzPHIh1WPQIkewbbhGH+y9uWR+DBfIOmLDk2MS2S4UDTpdYyRxxkZaqefPtdfT xdOIlGUdVMPbvmddOlQ9 =OLsD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9SzJfJEKNI6APITJ-- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html