From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library? Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:32:42 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20181110192027.GA29892@kroah.com> <20181112023630.GA20359@kroah.com> <20181112090828.2573987d@lwn.net> <20181210092706.1aa54432@lwn.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Carlos O'Donell , Jonathan Corbet Cc: Greg KH , Daniel Colascione , linux-kernel , Joel Fernandes , Linux API List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 12/10/18 9:39 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On 12/10/18 11:27 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote: >> On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 20:38:56 -0800 >> Randy Dunlap wrote: >> >>> On 11/12/18 8:08 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote: >>>> On Sun, 11 Nov 2018 18:36:30 -0800 >>>> Greg KH wrote: >>>> >>>>> We should have a checklist. That's a great idea. Now to find someone >>>>> to write it... :) >>>> >>>> Do we think the LPC session might have the right people to create such a >>>> thing? If so, I can try to put together a coherent presentation of the >>>> result. >>> >>> Hi, >>> Did anything ever happen with this syscall checklist suggestion? >> >> No, we really didn't have the right people around to do that, >> unfortunately. > > We already have Documentation/process/adding-syscalls.rst. > > The documentation there is quite thorough. > > It lists things that people commonly forget e.g. email linux-api@vger.kernel.org. > > Would it be acceptable to attempt to collate per-libc information > into the adding-syscalls.rst under a new section called: > > "Integration with libc" > I think that updates to adding-syscalls.rst would be sufficient, instead of having a new/separate syscalls-checklist file. thanks, -- ~Randy