Re: [golang-dev] Re: Moving Go to a newer NetBSD ABI in the 1.13 dev cycle

[Martin Husemann <martin%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 09:49:21AM +0000, maya%netbsd.org@localhost wrote:
> The proposed options for this scenario (judging by the Darwin code) are:
> Go code -> Go ABI to C ABI translation -> syscall stub in libc -> syscall
> 
> vs.
> Go code -> Go ABI syscall stub -> syscall

There is missing the system call specific stuff between the first two
links here, and the Go-ABI-to-system-call-abi translation in the second one,
so it is not clear at all to me which method would perform better.

All these layers/shims are pretty tiny, so I wouldn't be suprised if there
would be no measurable difference (but I'd love to see hard numbers).

> (wild option for portability but not compatibility*, using the
> Syscall{,6,9} functions with SYS_syscall more, which is probably less
> heavy)
> 
> * Which we won't gain anyway, see:
> http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-pkg/2019/03/08/msg020917.html

Sorry, I fail to parse this (including your tech-pkg post).

Martin