From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carlos O'Donell Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library? Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:34:14 -0500 Message-ID: <8189c55f-8869-8d54-bb23-1234bc6728b8@redhat.com> References: <877ehjx447.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <875zx2vhpd.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <20181113193859.GJ3505@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> <5853c297-9d84-86e5-dede-aa2957562c6b@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: To: Joseph Myers , Daniel Colascione Cc: Szabolcs Nagy , Dave P Martin , nd , Florian Weimer , "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" , linux-kernel , Joel Fernandes , Linux API , Willy Tarreau , Vlastimil Babka , "libc-alpha@sourceware.org" List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 11/14/18 1:47 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Wed, 14 Nov 2018, Daniel Colascione wrote: > >> A good demonstration of a new commitment to pragmatism would be >> merging the trivial wrappers for gettid(2). > > I support the addition of gettid (for use with those syscalls that take > tids, and with appropriate documentation explaining the properties of > tids) - and, generally, wrappers for all non-obsolescent > architecture-independent Linux kernel syscalls, including ones that are > very Linux-specific, except maybe for a few interfaces fundamentally > inconsistent with glibc managing TLS etc. - they are, at least, no worse > as a source of APIs than all the old BSD / SVID interfaces we have from > when those were used as sources of APIs. I agree. Documentation is important. -- Cheers, Carlos.