On 3 October 2011 09:35, Andrew Haley <a...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 09/30/2011 08:54 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: >> On Fri, 30 Sep 2011, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >> >>> On 26 July 2011 10:01, Dr. David Alan Gilbert <david.gilb...@linaro.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> + >>>> +extern unsigned int __write(int fd, const void *buf, unsigned int count); >>> >>> Why are we using __write instead of write? >> >> Because plain write is in the user's namespace in ISO C. See what I said >> in <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg00084.html> - the >> alternative is hardcoding the syscall number and using the syscall >> directly. > > That would be better, no? Unless __write is part of the glibc API, > which AFAIK it isn't.
I could change it to calling the syscall directly - although it gets a little messy having to deal with both ARM and Thumb syscalls; I was trying to avoid further complicating an already complicated corner case. Dave
