Explain this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18057649

This comment is saying that the overhead of the libc calls is (or should be) almost nothing compared to the cost of the syscall itself. The libc calls wraps the syscall, it can't be faster (vDSO aside).

Ah! That makes sense now. I thought it would be impossible for LibC to be faster than a syscall short of it cannibalizing the kernel.