Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

t; >> On Dec 25, 4:42pm, n...@gmx.com (Kamil Rytarowski) wrote: > >> -- Subject: Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe > >> > >> | I've extracted two changes from the original mail: > >> | > >> | https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2017/12/25/msg022

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

In article <ba9f8f1b-66c7-1168-f17b-c7e88bcf0...@gmx.com>, Kamil Rytarowski <n...@gmx.com> wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On 25.12.2017 17:43, Christos Zoulas wrote: >> On Dec 25, 4:42pm, n...@gmx.com (Kamil Rytarowski) wrote: >> -- Subject: Re: Proposa

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

In article , Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On 25.12.2017 16:37, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >> On 24.12.2017 22:25, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >>> I propose to deprecate SYS_pipe. >>> >>> It is a special syscall that

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

On 25.12.2017 17:18, Valery Ushakov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 16:37:43 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > >> On 24.12.2017 22:25, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >> >>> http://netbsd.org/~kamil/patch-00039-obsolete-SYS_pipe.txt >> >> I've extracted two patches from the above proposal. >> >> In these

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

On 25.12.2017 17:43, Christos Zoulas wrote: > On Dec 25, 4:42pm, n...@gmx.com (Kamil Rytarowski) wrote: > -- Subject: Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe > > | I've extracted two changes from the original mail: > | > | https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2017/12/25/msg02

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

On 25.12.2017 16:37, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > On 24.12.2017 22:25, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >> I propose to deprecate SYS_pipe. >> >> It is a special syscall that returns two integers from one function >> call. Fanciness is not compatible with regular C syntax and it demands >> per-cpu assembly

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

On Dec 25, 4:42pm, n...@gmx.com (Kamil Rytarowski) wrote: -- Subject: Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe | I've extracted two changes from the original mail: | | https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2017/12/25/msg022836.html Yes, the first patch is exactly what I had in mind; remove

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 16:37:43 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > On 24.12.2017 22:25, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > > > http://netbsd.org/~kamil/patch-00039-obsolete-SYS_pipe.txt > > I've extracted two patches from the above proposal. > > In these patches SYS_pipe is not marked COMPAT_80 and not

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

On 24.12.2017 22:25, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > I propose to deprecate SYS_pipe. > > It is a special syscall that returns two integers from one function > call. Fanciness is not compatible with regular C syntax and it demands > per-cpu assembly wrappers and rump-kernel workarounds. It's not easily

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

In article , Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On 25.12.2017 03:42, John Nemeth wrote: >> On Dec 24, 9:37pm, Mouse wrote: >> } >> } > http://netbsd.org/~kamil/patch-00039-obsolete-SYS_pipe.txt >> } >> } I see no

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

On Dec 24, 2017 11:10 PM, "Robert Elz" wrote: Date:Sun, 24 Dec 2017 18:42:19 -0800 From:John Nemeth Message-ID: <201712250242.vbp2gjjm017...@server.cornerstoneservice.ca> | HISTORY | A pipe() function call appeared in

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

On 25.12.2017 03:42, John Nemeth wrote: > On Dec 24, 9:37pm, Mouse wrote: > } > } > http://netbsd.org/~kamil/patch-00039-obsolete-SYS_pipe.txt > } > } I see no pipe2(2), nor change from pipe(2) to pipe(3) (with an xref to > } pipe2(2)), both of which, it seems to me, should be part of this. > >

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

Date:Sun, 24 Dec 2017 18:42:19 -0800 From:John Nemeth Message-ID: <201712250242.vbp2gjjm017...@server.cornerstoneservice.ca> | HISTORY | A pipe() function call appeared in Version 6 AT UNIX. That I think would be a man page bug - pipe()

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

Date:Sun, 24 Dec 2017 22:25:15 +0100 From:Kamil Rytarowski Message-ID: <88ef8f04-bd40-af2d-6284-eb0376895...@gmail.com> | - I've marked pipe(2) as compat_80. Because we would need this (obviously) there is nothing really being gained by

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

> My NetBSD 7.x systems have the manpage as well. One might wish to > look for manpages on a system newer then 1.4T. :-> 5.2, slightly newer than 1.4T :), doesn't have it. I would argue that it still needs pipe(2) to be converted into pipe(3) with an xref to pipe2(2). > The big thing is that

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

On Dec 24, 9:37pm, Mouse wrote: } } > http://netbsd.org/~kamil/patch-00039-obsolete-SYS_pipe.txt } } I see no pipe2(2), nor change from pipe(2) to pipe(3) (with an xref to } pipe2(2)), both of which, it seems to me, should be part of this. From:

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

> http://netbsd.org/~kamil/patch-00039-obsolete-SYS_pipe.txt I see no pipe2(2), nor change from pipe(2) to pipe(3) (with an xref to pipe2(2)), both of which, it seems to me, should be part of this. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML

Re: Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 10:25:15PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > It is a special syscall that returns two integers from one function > call. Fanciness is not compatible with regular C syntax and it demands > per-cpu assembly wrappers and rump-kernel workarounds. It's not easily > usable with

Proposal to obsolete SYS_pipe

I propose to deprecate SYS_pipe. It is a special syscall that returns two integers from one function call. Fanciness is not compatible with regular C syntax and it demands per-cpu assembly wrappers and rump-kernel workarounds. It's not easily usable with syscall(2). OpenBSD and FreeBSD already