[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <538D09CD.2080006@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 16:33:33 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
LKML Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, joseph@...esourcery.com,
john.stultz@...aro.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
tglx@...utronix.de, geert@...ux-m68k.org, lftan@...era.com,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, xfs@....sgi.com,
Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 11/32] xfs: convert to struct inode_time
On 06/02/2014 04:32 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 03:32:35PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 06/02/2014 03:29 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>>
>>> And since we are already returning (time_t) -1 in some cases, we might
>>> as well try to make things a bit more formal.
>>>
>>
>> Are we? I am not aware of *Linux* actually using that.
>
> Linux's time(2) can return (time_t) -1 and set errno to EFAULT, per
> the Posix specification:
>
> SYSCALL_DEFINE1(time, time_t __user *, tloc)
> {
> time_t i = get_seconds();
>
> if (tloc) {
> if (put_user(i,tloc))
> return -EFAULT;
> }
> force_successful_syscall_return();
> return i;
> }
>
OK, I guess I should have said... other than for -EFAULT.
I just don't know of anyone using time(2) with an argument other than NULL.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists