common name for the kernel DSO

common name for the kernel DSO

[David Mosberger]

Both x86 and ia64 now provide a dynamically shared object (DSO) for
system call purposes (e.g., to speed up system calls and for signal
trampoline/sigreturn purposes).  At the moment, the names of these
DSOs are different:

	x86:	linux-vsyscall.so.1
	ia64:	linux-gate.so.1

I think there is some value in using the same name on all platforms
that support such a DSO.  vsyscall makes no sense for ia64, since
there are no virtual syscalls (instead, ia64 linux provides a fast
system call convention which, when coupled with light-weight system
call handlers, provide full syscall semantics at more or less the
speed of virtual system calls).

Not surprisingly, I like the name "linux-gate", since that is really
what this DSO is all about: it's a gateway between user and kernel
space.  However, if this name isn't appropriate for x86, perhaps we
can find another name which will be acceptable to everybody.

I already checked with Roland McGrath (cc'd), and he agrees that a
common name would be good and said that he doesn't care about the
particular name that will be used.

Does anyone have any strong feelings about this?  If not, I plan to
submit a patch to rename the x86 DSO to linux-gate.so.1.

Thanks,

	--david

Re: common name for the kernel DSO

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 12:12:21PM -0700, David Mosberger wrote:
> Not surprisingly, I like the name "linux-gate", since that is really
> what this DSO is all about: it's a gateway between user and kernel
> space.  However, if this name isn't appropriate for x86, perhaps we
> can find another name which will be acceptable to everybody.

Hi David.

I see no clean way to share the rules between the architectures,
at least not without doing something very special for this.
The second best alternative is to have the same implementation
in all architectures supporting this, so my vote goes for the
gate name.

PS. One day I hope to find a better solution for the gross ld_flags hack..

	Sam

Re: common name for the kernel DSO

[David Mosberger]

>>>>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 22:32:47 +0200, Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> said:

  Sam> I see no clean way to share the rules between the architectures,
  Sam> at least not without doing something very special for this.

Yes.  I think that's OK.

  Sam> The second best alternative is to have the same implementation
  Sam> in all architectures supporting this, so my vote goes for the
  Sam> gate name.

OK, noted.

	--david