Sponsored link
Vyatta –
Linux & Open Source
Alternative to Cisco –
Advanced Routing,
Firewall, VPN, QoS..
Free Download ->
| |||||||||||
sys_indirect()sys_indirect()Posted Nov 22, 2007 14:14 UTC (Thu) by i3839 (subscriber, #31386)Parent article: sys_indirect()
> Naturally, it would be surprising to see applications ever making calls to > indirect(), well, directly. A much more likely scenario is for uses of > indirect() to be buried inside the C library, which would then export a > more straightforward interface to the application. I really hate this attitude. Especially if this argument is used to justify an ugly interface. If the systemcall isn't supposed to be used directly by applications, it isn't worth existing.
(Log in to post comments)
sys_indirect() Posted Nov 22, 2007 15:16 UTC (Thu) by tyhik (subscriber, #14747) [Link] "If the systemcall isn't supposed to be used directly by applications, it isn't worth existing." There exist some, and rightly so. futex() comes to mind. But indirect() is ugly indeed.
sys_indirect() Posted Nov 22, 2007 18:28 UTC (Thu) by i3839 (subscriber, #31386) [Link] The futex adds a unique and useful feature which can also be interesting for certain apps/libraries other than glibc. The API is a bit ugly, mostly because of historical reasons it seems. But what they seem to be wanting to do here is providing a userspace wrapper in glibc for the indirect variant of a syscall, and that's just plain silly.
|
|||||||||||