[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTikwtpOXZUt2_zo5=kQMFGSuF1kpiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 08:27:34 +0300
From: Serge Ziryukin <ftrvxmtrx@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add eventfd syscall wrapper and helper
abstractions as in glibc
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> wrote:
> 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.
>
Oh, sorry. My mistake.
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.
