I stumbled upon this code block, which confuses me: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/84c849e85b0f8ab2d8bbeb2d9c46349f019f4e8e/clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/FreeBSD.cpp#L329-L337

If needed I can run a mini exp-run on ports with this change applied and devel/libunwind disabled akin to https://reviews.freebsd.org/D50736

Do we think that the base system libunwind is as feature complete as devel/libunwind?

The issue is still there, so I'm updating the diff, just in case

Sounds about right.

Actually, most of missing stuff is only used in logging, so it isn't a big deal.

Turns out that a new version of security/sssd2 needs this. Since it wasn't MFCed, is there some simple compatibility shim that can be used?

In D50964#1163718, @jhb wrote:

What is the motivation? Is the intention for ports to start using this instead of, say, devel/libunwind?

Just a note that KDE rolls out a new CI infrastructure and they would greatly benefit from the virtiofs support.

Can this change be MFC'd into 14-STABLE? KDE folks are rolling out a new CI infrastructure and they need FreeBSD to support either 9p or virtiofs.

In D50831#1161439, @asomers wrote:

Where? That man page hasn't been changed since 2022.

What man page? The information on how to read exterrors is located in kdumps manpage.

• exterrorize one more errno

• Address comments

• Use EXTERROR

I'm going to submit another diff that removes trace probes after finishing with exterrorizing.

• Address comments
• Make use of SET_ERROR*() becoming an expression

LGTM, but you're still ORing POLLHUP into revents, not setting it. As I mentioned in comment, it seems that the FreeBSD way to report EOF is to return POLLHUP only.

LGTM, but my review doesn't worth much.

I mostly have no idea how this code works, but I tried to provide some review.

In D50315#1158082, @markj wrote:

Per what I wrote above, I believe the native implementation would still be used, but the application would be compiled against libinotify inotify.h.