Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 25 Jun 2019 18:29:20 +0000
From:   Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
To:     Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@suse.de>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 13/14] epoll: implement epoll_create2() syscall
Message-ID: <20190625182920.abpecnwxdjdg7sjl@dcvr>
References: <20190624144151.22688-1-rpenyaev@suse.de>
 <20190624144151.22688-14-rpenyaev@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190624144151.22688-14-rpenyaev@suse.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@suse.de> wrote:
> epoll_create2() is needed to accept EPOLL_USERPOLL flags
> and size, i.e. this patch wires up polling from userspace.

Instead of adding a new syscall, is setting size (and/or even
the EPOLL_USEREPOLL flag) something that could be done via
ioctl?

There's no race like CLOEXEC to worry about and it's not
going to be in a hot path where the extra syscall matters.

glibc won't need to increase in .so size, either.