On 21/08/24 14:02, enh wrote: > i see glibc has a _symbol_ for arch_prctl(), but there's nothing in > the headers? a variety of projects seem to `extern` it themselves so > they can use the glibc symbol, even though the man page denies that it > exists and suggests you use syscall() instead. > > is this half-existence deliberate, or should it be fixed one way or > the other (adding the header declaration or removing the symbol)? > > i notice musl is the same, but i assume that's just for glibc > compatibility rather than an actual decision on their part. > > before i copy the same oddity in bionic for > https://blog.chromium.org/2024/06/building-faster-smarter-chromebook.html > i thought i'd at least _ask_ :-) > It seems to be a overlook from when it was originally added (a47fd6810cb). I think we should add a x86 sys/prctl.h with the definition.
