From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 25 02:22:55 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3934BC4C; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 02:22:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com) Received: from mail.netplex.net (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C88BE8FC0C; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 02:22:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.0.0.56] (ip-414b102e.ct.fixed.ntplx.com [65.75.16.46]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netplex.net (8.14.5/8.14.5/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id qAP2Mn7n054240 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 24 Nov 2012 21:22:49 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.netplex.net) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.10]); Sat, 24 Nov 2012 21:22:49 -0500 (EST) References: <20121124193010.GB1627@lonesome.com> <50B12520.7040508@mu.org> <50B145C5.8070503@mu.org> <50B16E7A.60900@mu.org> <50B178A3.4070305@mu.org> <46D582BB-1EB9-4080-9733-7558D6D87FA8@bsdimp.com> <50B17BF7.7020609@mu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) In-Reply-To: <50B17BF7.7020609@mu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10A525) From: Daniel Eischen Subject: Re: [RFC] sema_wait_sig Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2012 21:22:52 -0500 To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: "attilio@freebsd.org" , Mark Linimon , Oleksandr Tymoshenko , "arch@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 02:22:55 -0000 On Nov 24, 2012, at 9:01 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > On 11/24/12 5:56 PM, Warner Losh wrote: >> On Nov 24, 2012, at 6:47 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >>=20 >>>=20 >>> 1) compat layer >>> /usr/src.local/sys/ofed/drivers/infiniband/core # >>> cddl/contrib/opensolaris >>>=20 >>> 2) >>> if a user expects semaphores and we tell them to "rethink" things, then w= e're not providing the same facilities as every other non-BSD OS. >>>=20 >>> I guess that makes us "cool", but really it just seems out of touch. >>>=20 >>> The implementation is 176 lines of code + some headers. >>>=20 >>> The sad part to me is that the original user asked "hey I need sema+sign= al" but we don't know the facility they really need, count of 1? count of 1= 0? instead of just giving them a textbook CS semaphore we tell them to "buil= d your own using our primitives". >> You don't need stdio, you can build it from the syscall primitives... >=20 > Dude, don't make me replace string.h/strncpy/strlcpy with sbuf_(9), cause I= will! Can we please chill? We're not talking about getting rid of a commonly used= API with sema(9). We want to do what is right for FreeBSD, not Linux. Tha= t's not to say we can't have a Linux kernel compat shim or something, but th= ey should be hidden accordingly and not used by native drivers and such. We= definitely don't want every API for every OS, or we will become an amalgama= tion of those OSs. -- DE=