This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
RE: [PATCH] x86: Wire up 32-bit direct socket calls
- From: David Laight <David dot Laight at ACULAB dot COM>
- To: "'H. Peter Anvin'" <hpa at zytor dot com>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert at linux-m68k dot org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto at kernel dot org>
- Cc: X86 ML <x86 at kernel dot org>, Network Development <netdev at vger dot kernel dot org>, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto at amacapital dot net>, "linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org" <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, Alexander Larsson <alexl at redhat dot com>, Cosimo Cecchi <cosimo at endlessm dot com>, Dan Nicholson <nicholson at endlessm dot com>, libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, "Rajalakshmi Srinivasaraghavan" <raji at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Linux-Arch <linux-arch at vger dot kernel dot org>
- Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 10:06:24 +0000
- Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86: Wire up 32-bit direct socket calls
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <cb5138299d37d5800e2d135b01a7667fa6115854 dot 1436912629 dot git dot luto at kernel dot org> <CAMuHMdXKA_+JY2ryf-yoJxQnbW=jsOjj_w2-Nsybpx0310neDA at mail dot gmail dot com> <55E75913 dot 5050605 at zytor dot com>
From: Peter Anvin
> Sent: 02 September 2015 21:16
> On 09/02/2015 02:48 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >
> > Should all other architectures follow suit?
> > Or should we follow the s390 approach:
> >
>
> It is up to the maintainer(s), largely dependent on how likely you are
> going to want to support this in your libc, but in general, socketcall
> is an abomination which there is no reason not to bypass.
The other (worse) abomination is the way SCTP overloads setsockopt()
to perform actions that change state.
Rather unfortunately that got documented in the protocol standard :-(
David