From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/6165 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Justin Cormack Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: musl on a different syscall layer? Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 09:59:54 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20140917145758.GI25738@example.net> <20140917175346.GB23797@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20140917180222.GL25738@example.net> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1411030816 22922 80.91.229.3 (18 Sep 2014 09:00:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 09:00:16 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-6178-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Sep 18 11:00:11 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XUXZS-0006wY-Eb for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 11:00:10 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 11559 invoked by uid 550); 18 Sep 2014 09:00:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 11551 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2014 09:00:05 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=specialbusservice.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=lWd50yOS72J5aH8iZr4OBBqWK7JPlr94GjA4kQYgYX8=; b=AXSA9nLkoKKvW8eK3EDZqKUwrgbEq4Jkc0vbhJ4ckwVApOHusqAyNsu9x6box+LkqX Rrt5PM8wbvNxosJXqBHokGeVPrKfkSuB7/OTV7P7HUKE+4qe1xHL80M3tTp2hu6aGTf/ 3V7P9tjm2bZr3tnAvleyhxtAE4Wl5vwqMIh2A= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=lWd50yOS72J5aH8iZr4OBBqWK7JPlr94GjA4kQYgYX8=; b=mlY4y14U7gE/zLBtu3dSl/WbYu4udcez4w8/wOTh3Ldcy7yQPPF3+HnRyuHl6d8alX t4ihc8GAtBjVIy9+e31STShgCZ+keBFaWNt5dQBG/3ATUb0NBX+yhQ1PCzexWTXMz2xl 6YYdZT2EN2OcPD7t4gcsPj9Y1N2BnA/bUqqY4m7VaQBl3D/4/aTRb1PsuXX7w8RuQ07l j3Za9ah+aXP8yuTwD44MDP6tXeFlEADBjiU40DQqgW/SYVeqpCdLXFDgUZsL3u500XT/ 3Fb7T3ZKKM7reAkfZ7CmJ35dpfgMqfVOXlhIs2KmdkR7yiKk26WMVT1kuxUY/70gDRfI +34Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkoOe0bKCgb6Eu0w9dCu4+uzjPUWg7M3dIxcZ+sFZSoyoosDg9XqjjkUIlHKwA8IM6z19Vp X-Received: by 10.152.10.2 with SMTP id e2mr1684857lab.96.1411030794460; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 01:59:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140917180222.GL25738@example.net> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:6165 Archived-At: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 7:02 PM, wrote: > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 01:53:46PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: >> The main requirement is having equivalent functionality available. On >> the BSD targets I've asked BSD folks about, there's supposedly no >> equivalent of futex except inthe Linux compat layer, which is pretty >> much a show-stopper unless/until it can be remedied. clone is a big >> unknown to me too. The other big potential problem is if the native >> syscall API requires a stack to communicate with the kernel (one or >> more BSDs require this, IIRC), since at least __unmapself needs to be >> able to call SYS_munmap and SYS_exit without a stack. > > Oh I see. > > This means "not much to hope for" (pity but good to know). I don't think NetBSD uses the stack for syscalls on any common architecture, maybe on some of the obscure ones, but maybe you don't want to support them. Adding futex support to NetBSD would be an interesting project; it is not in the compat layer at present either, so that is a good reason to add it. NetBSD is pretty friendly... Justin (justin@netbsd.org)