[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110505041556.GP277@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 00:15:56 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add eventfd syscall wrapper and helper
abstractions as in glibc
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:59:45PM +0300, Serge Ziryukin wrote:
> abstractions are:
>
> typedef uint64_t eventfd_t;
> int eventfd_read(int fd, eventfd_t *value);
> int eventfd_write(int fd, eventfd_t value);
>
> these are trying to hide the details of reading and writing
> on an eventfd descriptor.
Seems silly, but if that's the usual API I have no objections. It's
small anyway.
> +int eventfd(unsigned int count, int flags)
> +{
> + return syscall(SYS_eventfd, count, flags);
> +}
Shouldn't this be flags ? SYS_eventfd2 : SYS_eventfd...? The old
SYS_eventfd supposedly does not support flags.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
