Can anyone help clarify details about the FreeBSD system call interface?

[Steven Stewart-Gallus]

> I don't have any particular objection to such a thing existing, but
> I wonder whether the developer time to create it could be better
> used on other things.  I guess it comes down to what value it is
> seen as providing.

I'm not suggesting anybody else create this stuff. I plan to work on
patches for some of this stuff myself.

Eg)

.\" Copyright (c) 2014
.\"	The Regents of the University of California.  All rights reserved.
.\"
.\" Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
.\" modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
.\" are met:
.\" 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
.\"    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
.\" 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
.\"    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
.\"    documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
.\" 4. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors
.\"    may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
.\"    without specific prior written permission.
.\"
.\" THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
.\" ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
.\" IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
.\" ARE DISCLAIMED.  IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
.\" FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
.\" DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
.\" OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
.\" HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
.\" LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
.\" OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
.\" SUCH DAMAGE.
.\"
.\"     @(#)unimplemented.2	8.2 (Berkeley) 1/09/14
.\" $FreeBSD$
.\"
.Dd September 1, 2014
.Dt UNIMPLEMENTED 2
.Os
.Sh NAME
.Nm nnpfs_syscall, afs3_syscall
.Nd unimplemented system calls
.Sh SYNOPSIS
Unimplemented system calls.
.Sh DESCRIPTION
These system calls are not implemented in the standard FreeBSD kernel
and are reserved for the use of third parties.

.Sh RETURN VALUES
These calls return \-1 and set errno to ENOSYS.

I've also already started work on an nlm_syscall man page but I'm
starting to think that if symlinks are supported it should just
symlink to rpc.lockd.8. Also if symlinks in the doc system are
supported then I can just symlink nnpfs_syscall.2 and afs3_syscall to
unimplemented.2. I'm not sure if I want to wait until I've documented
umtx_syscall or just submit the patch ealier.

Thank you,
Steven Stewart-Gallus