[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fb340c72-c484-7f55-a2bd-71e072d7f1f5@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 09:58:15 -0500
From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@...hat.com>
To: Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>,
Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>
Cc: nd <nd@....com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
"libc-alpha@...rceware.org" <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>
Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?
On 11/14/18 6:58 AM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> an actual proposal in the thread that i think is
> worth considering is to make the linux syscall
> design process involve libc devs so the c api is
> designed together with the syscall abi.
Right, I see at least 2 actionable items:
* "The Checklist" which everyone making a syscall should
follow and we create the checklist with input from both
sides and it becomes the thing you reference e.g.
"Did you follow the checklist? Where is X?"
* Programmatic / Machine readable description of syscalls.
This way the kernel gives users the ability to autogenerate
all the wrappers *if they want to* in a consistent way that
matches this syscall description format.
--
Cheers,
Carlos.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists