[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1a0341a3e3f.3a316d91560530.3385477843898623045@soss.website>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 09:08:50 -0500
From: Skye Soss <skye@...s.website>
To: "musl" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add linux-specific close_range syscall wrapper
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
> * Skye Soss <skye@...s.website> [2026-08-23 22:10:39 -0500]:
> > This patch adds the close_range syscall wrapper.
> >
> > The syscall was added in Linux 5.9.
> >
> > There was prior discussion more than 4 years ago on this addition. This patch
> > is slightly modified to put the CLOSE_RANGE_UNSHARE macro definition inside
> > the _GNU_SOURCE section, as FreeBSD defines *_CLOEXEC but not *_UNSHARE.
>
> fwiw i'd put all the flags under the same feature test macro
> and consider CLOSE_RANGE_ prefix reserved for that case.
>
> in glibc they are all under _GNU_SOURCE.
>
I'll make that change for a v2 if no one disagrees. Looking more into the history,
"BSD derived" is probably a stretch as FreeBSD and Linux were coordinating on the
design: it just so happened FreeBSD was faster.
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
> The cast does cause any sign extension from bit 31, if it were ever
> used, not to extend up past bit 31 into high bits on a 64-bit arch.
> This is probably good.
Good point. That may be worth mentioning in the commit message body.
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.
