Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:52:23 +0000 (UTC) | From | Mathieu Desnoyers <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v11 for 4.15 01/24] Restartable sequences system call |
| |
----- On Nov 14, 2017, at 3:39 PM, Ben Maurer bmaurer@fb.com wrote:
>> int rseq(struct rseq * rseq, uint32_t rseq_len, int flags, uint32_t sig); > > Really dumb question -- and one I'm sorry to bring up at the last minute. Should > we consider making the syscall name something more generic "register_tls_abi"? > I'm assuming that if we ever want to use a per-thread userspace/kernel ABI > we'll want to use this field given the difficulty of getting adoption of > registration, the need to involve glibc, etc. It seems like there could be > future use cases of this TLS area that have nothing to do with rseq.
I proposed that approach back in 2016 ("tls abi" system call), and the feedback I received back then is that it was preferred to have a dedicated "rseq" system call than an "open ended" and generic "tls abi" system call.
Thanks,
Mathieu
-- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
| |