This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: linux:sys_ipc syscall
- From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki dot motohiro at jp dot fujitsu dot com>
- To: Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>
- Cc: kosaki dot motohiro at jp dot fujitsu dot com, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, monstr at monstr dot eu
- Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 09:37:29 +0900 (JST)
- Subject: Re: linux:sys_ipc syscall
- References: <20090507092727.265D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <200905062034.23174.vapier@gentoo.org>
> On Wednesday 06 May 2009 20:29:03 KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 06 May 2009 20:13:16 KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > > > I would like to ask you if someone from you work on separate ipc
> > > > > syscalls. I mean that all code call one sys_ipc syscall not separate
> > > > > syscall like sys_semctl, sys_semget, sys_semop, sys_msgctl,
> > > > > sys_msgget, sys_msgrcv, sys_msgsnd, sys_shmat, sys_shmctl, sys_shmdt,
> > > > > sys_shmget.
> > > > >
> > > > > I look at http://repo.or.cz/w/glibc.git and I haven't seen it there.
> > > >
> > > > May I ask the benfit of this change?
> > > > In general, unnecessally ABI change cause very large end-user
> > > > confusion.
> > >
> > > the ABI change is between C library and kernel. there is no end-user
> > > difference.
> >
> > you assume end-user install newer kernel and glibc at the same time.
> > but it isn't gurantee.
>
> he isnt talking about adding funcs to a port that didnt already have them.
> he's asking how to use the split version of IPC rather than the multi subcall.
> -mike
Ah, I see.
sorry, I was confused.