From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from second.openwall.net (second.openwall.net [193.110.157.125]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5A79029788 for ; Wed, 29 May 2024 17:11:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 11284 invoked by uid 550); 29 May 2024 15:11:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 10219 invoked from network); 29 May 2024 15:11:22 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastly.com; s=google; t=1716995473; x=1717600273; darn=lists.openwall.com; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=gWV4KHbZJEqqK7tLpIityB7AV5hwzQSdYOCfAtO7vIo=; b=jZaQYO/Hq54h6Ij1tBitdrlWYT6rtKmHLMzU/yjXPFoMm+UxCTCQxHpN6BMcV7kdQi 6o5ZgEjJd9yPTbNZQvCOyZmtlID8eTdEJMEKF2ZL5jgG1Te4Ry3K57z2w7nNrDdnMYDi Oh+qfmTJKM5bnML02HZ0ECdFxOP3OQSA8W41o= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1716995473; x=1717600273; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=gWV4KHbZJEqqK7tLpIityB7AV5hwzQSdYOCfAtO7vIo=; b=i+nYSSR6MyZJQbrVZ2llcJNf4OUdZdrT8AHxH89VjHE/coD/ayPz8fG1C8etSQhSVm +Ife3j2eHhBXerNXbSqOLh0DPQKm5u8mPBlMGSO7paFtu894V3mkCFxvWSmoJoNuzws2 m3LTfoVG0LK6Sl67Q4GK9Ugt4d1G+2mBCaU2nWoPLUZOrVmyltV8YW32rUgJxVZ082sO ZxfzY56AjoFAL4X46xr/BGvIE+7vlhxTxMHAA4yckbmRtNGO20vn3aYc4k9b2XBcW79y W67jm1n4upeDgMmYcQCulz+zAUAyW5qqCHUq202J9SdK28YFfx5z0/oc7v48sJH+78nS zKuA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxBRplerqzsEG3dfRo7Nb0ThX5OiOHsH2Od+XGpkkqWhQkIeaGW WsBtrraXqs8b90r7UFtLOEqNZpLZzkpmGUcKlfXu7CbLkhgEOYy8zjfblL2G63c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGALAV2XoNcXqsN18gqrNYK4SjO6I4eLUuFZX/Y1UO7Anzyyn8xK90OOj78LZPsteWm5gOO0Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3c1:b0:2bd:b302:95d9 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2c02e8e1071mr3796518a91.0.1716995473163; Wed, 29 May 2024 08:11:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 08:11:10 -0700 From: Joe Damato To: Rich Felker Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: References: <20240529064959.1733708-1-jdamato@fastly.com> <20240529131707.GI10433@brightrain.aerifal.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240529131707.GI10433@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH] sys/epoll.h: add epoll ioctls On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 09:17:07AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 06:49:59AM +0000, Joe Damato wrote: > > add two ioctls to get and set struct epoll_params to allow users to > > control epoll based busy polling of network sockets. > > > > added to uapi in commit 18e2bf0edf4dd88d9656ec92395aa47392e85b61 (Linux > > kernel 6.9 and newer). > > --- > > include/sys/epoll.h | 12 ++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/include/sys/epoll.h b/include/sys/epoll.h > > index ac81a841..5f975c4a 100644 > > --- a/include/sys/epoll.h > > +++ b/include/sys/epoll.h > > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ extern "C" { > > > > #include > > #include > > +#include > > #include > > > > #define __NEED_sigset_t > > @@ -54,6 +55,17 @@ __attribute__ ((__packed__)) > > #endif > > ; > > > > +struct epoll_params { > > + uint32_t busy_poll_usecs; > > + uint16_t busy_poll_budget; > > + uint8_t prefer_busy_poll; > > + > > + uint8_t __pad; > > +}; > > + > > +#define EPOLL_IOC_TYPE 0x8A > > +#define EPIOCSPARAMS _IOW(EPOLL_IOC_TYPE, 0x01, struct epoll_params) > > +#define EPIOCGPARAMS _IOR(EPOLL_IOC_TYPE, 0x02, struct epoll_params) > > > > int epoll_create(int); > > int epoll_create1(int); > > -- > > 2.34.1 > > This is probably okay, but we should at least ask if sys/ioctl.h is > going to be a namespace mess. Is the intent to bring all of it in, or > just to get the EPIOC* macros which depend on _IOW and _IOR? Yes, sys/ioctl.h is pulled in for the _IOW and _IOR macros. Similar to, for example, sys/mtio.h in musl, which also pulls in sys/ioctl.h. > On glibc, does it pull in sys/ioctl.h? Yes, the code I've submit for glibc does pull in sys/ioctl.h. That code has been approved by a glibc committer, but not yet merged to the tree (I assume that will happen in a few days): https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2024-May/157166.html