On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 04:18:42PM +0300, Andrey Semashev wrote: > On 6/8/21 3:35 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 03:06:48PM +0300, Andrey Semashev wrote: > > > On 6/8/21 2:13 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > So what's keeping the futex2 code from doing all that futex1 does so > > > > that the futex1 code can be deleted internally? > > > > > > I think, André will answer this, but my guess is, as stated above, this is a > > > lot of work and time while the intermediate version is already useful. > > > > useful to who? I still do not understand what users will be needing > > this. All I can tell is a single userspace program wants to use it, and > > that is a fork from the real project it was based on and that the > > maintainers have no plan to merge it back. > > > > So who does need/want this? > > I mentioned C++ std::atomic and Boost.Atomic before. Those need variable > sized futexes. And has anyone converted them to use this new api to see if it works well or not? As was pointed out to me numerous times when I tried to propose readfile(), you need a real user that can show and prove it is needed before we can take new syscalls, especially complex beasts like this one. thanks, greg k-h
