From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:51639 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754539AbcCCQLm (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2016 11:11:42 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 17:11:40 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Sagi Grimberg , viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, axboe@fb.com, milosz@adfin.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: selective block polling and preadv2/pwritev2 revisited V3 Message-ID: <20160303161140.GA26015@lst.de> References: <1457017443-17662-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <56D853B5.9000906@dev.mellanox.co.il> <20160303151116.GA24614@lst.de> <2369295.6CpmrvqZVS@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2369295.6CpmrvqZVS@wuerfel> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 04:52:55PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > If we decide to revise the asm-generic/unistd.h system call list > for future architecture ports, can the syscalls replace all of > read/write/readv/writev/pread64/write64/preadv/pwritev, or would > it be better to keep all of them around indefinitely? It does replace all off them fully. I never quite understood why having the wrappers is better in libc than the kernel, though.