Re: [PATCH 2/3] network: recvmsg and sendmsg standard compliance (BZ#16919)

[Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>]

On 06/10/2016 02:19 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2016, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> 
>>> (A much more significant issue here is the ridiculous delays in adding
>>> things like gettid() and getrandom().)
>>
>> There are no delays in adding gettid or getrandom, there are only the
>> lack of skilled people willing to do the work at level of quality required
>> of a core library implementation.
> 
> For gettid I think the actual issue is difficulty in establishing 
> consensus in the absence of unanimity.  That's caused issues for all of: 
> gettid / pthread_gettid_np, explicit_bzero, strlcpy / strlcat, Linux 
> syscall wrappers in general especially where not appropriate for the 
> OS-independent GNU API.  (I think all of those are appropriate for 
> inclusion in glibc.)
 
The OS-independent GNU API is in my mind an issue of documentation,
describing which APIs are Linux-specific and which are not.

I would be happy to see gettid implemented as a wrapper if someone
would step up to document exactly how it behaves and where it is valid
to use the resulting return value and in what APIs. That I think is
where everyone balks at the work.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.