* Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Sure, no problem. Do you have an opinion on the question I raised in the > first patch [1], i.e. whether we actually want this to be done this way in the > kernel, or one of the other approaches I described there? So this looks like the most forward looking variant: > a) deprecate the wait4() and getrusage() system calls, and create > a set of kernel interfaces based around a newly defined structure that > could solve multiple problems at once, e.g. provide more fine-grained > timestamps. The C library could then implement the posix interfaces > on top of the new system calls. ... but given the pretty long propagation time of new ABIs, is this a good solution? What would the limitations/trade-offs be on old-ABI systems? Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
