https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65070
--- Comment #4 from Nadav Har'El <nyh at math dot technion.ac.il> --- There is a fine line between relying on "Linux" (e.g., the glibc ABI functions as defined in LSB for example), and relying on obscure architecture-specific tricks (like calling the syscall *instruction* in a way that only works on x86-64). The latter may be justified when performance is the ultimate concern, but I wonder if this is the case here (as I explained in my previous comments). When is not the case, I don't understand why not use the syscall() library function. *That* is the Linux ABI, not the x86-64 instruction. This is not only an OSv question (although my attempt to use it in OSv brought up this question). It's also a question why all this complexity is needed, when glibc's syscall() function already has it. It looks to me like gratuitous duplication, unless I'm missing the real reason why this was done.
