From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/9522 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Pedro Giffuni Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: FreeBSD's Google Summer of Code 2016 Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 09:22:32 -0500 Message-ID: <56DD8EA8.5020303@FreeBSD.org> References: <56DB3D70.8010601@FreeBSD.org> <20160305212517.GK9349@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <56DB6095.4060204@FreeBSD.org> <20160305233254.GL9349@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <56DB766A.3050500@FreeBSD.org> <20160306002547.GM9349@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <56DD3C91.2070403@openwrt.org> <20160307130620.GW29662@port70.net> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457360519 16586 80.91.229.3 (7 Mar 2016 14:21:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 14:21:59 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-9535-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Mar 07 15:21:59 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1acw2k-0005lD-Jq for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 15:21:54 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 18398 invoked by uid 550); 7 Mar 2016 14:21:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 18374 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2016 14:21:51 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1457360499; bh=IOfB6zrERaxFAcz9z4DdSel4XQAs4xkGbCkGHfv/lWE=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=kWIFVYw7LEjeiE6zU5NlKaAHX7IVsfMqROUHvqSkOElfN7PpvBa9eYIegIYhOWweEJ5TQ7xQZgmivX3m4wDSeGbS6QlU/SQc+B7B8BIahebRBgMl2c+zj7rT1MSgKhfM0+bpQnhy4F6A74lbsgWnn/kRRDUKs1U1FCeM/54wpHf2zX8F4i68EJaDlxXfqID7GAHHlWcDcDZJS1OWVSI0pip6xUZh/1sAMJHP5hnYaumlOzRpOz9its0DBBMsmdVrej69d/3XOoQnUi94GNO900sDe0X//xwYUPaFGxuvub95PlqALQNx76VUWjK5ao9fil0ynixVRvgA+ZY0UtO/xg== X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 623727.66918.bm@smtp234.mail.bf1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: u5PrfCcVM1nSXf6LHbCRNS7VnRE4sVoUgawyMeCTLoc2.7a iF5bpKAr1gcDgAkLeoqEoA7JHvu0NcLroCBCKC2gpni.4oupesZt_grf7iYK 4014GZnUkIX6t78rKqtwbDUixNDKc6P3wri2BHRInqe3hJdZyhYlrzfx4StA pqNs1P4fDByxaq6J5H_zZKoAyeRDLttEGkNdfbs.PjP7FqoQqyrB4yJwDhhq tMqPN2pkqP2BT9vp2RLoJGgLwlEvAMNIzWqFRzM15tAK.OLP1THE4NYPbysI 5ZO0Z3uy2qozcLcwlXbjYbI1b.a76R5M5CKW8Kl8_MIrAXhWwaosvSkSAA2h mpz_.Ux7DZ1FKc.vXyygoaiuV3VMlOu7mkGstZcZqymcK8MGxxMMlAHByi6H 0oNpCV3FAjAVsNhfhe1VWgVTFfp_PYKZVkn.nvNPudOUFJ_gRgamcxrj6ozV zaRjsPlLT_snW4qqlPkakqd6oOyLFUihauB_WbHYdEDD_vpBRUXeyQZ_cnjP eekgR4Bc_a9bz8xAM9mmu0BBX7T8d49rT X-Yahoo-SMTP: xcjD0guswBAZaPPIbxpWwLcp9Unf User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 In-Reply-To: <20160307130620.GW29662@port70.net> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:9522 Archived-At: Hello; On 03/07/16 08:06, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > * Felix Fietkau [2016-03-07 09:32:17 +0100]: >> What about umtx? It's supposed to be just like linux futex. >> > > i see > https://svnweb.FreeBSD.org/base/head/sys/sys/umtx.h?view=markup > > but there seems to be no documentation for it in > https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi > > if _umtx_op does what it seems to do, then i think musl can be > ported to native freebsd syscalls, but i don't know how much > syscall abi stability freebsd is willing to guarantee. > i think historically that was assumed to be a private interface > between the libc and the kernel on bsd (in which case a musl port > cannot be easily maintained outside of the bsd source repo). > I wouldn't worry about ABI stability. We are not allowed to break the ABI per branch and with so many users depending on being able to run previous versions of FreeBSD within jails, and with the native threads and now linux binaries depending on it, there is no chance we can break it, We may introduce a new interface in the future (who knows) but we can't just drop an old one. Pedro.