Re: Probably incorrect formatting in timespec.3type

[Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1099 bytes --]

Hi!

On 7/21/22 16:39, наб wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 03:38:46PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>> Check timespec(3type) and search for 'syscall', followed by 'long', and
>> confirm if the formatting is what you wanted to put or not.
> 
> It is:
>    syscall is emphasised, since that's both the fundamental point
>    and a subtle difference as compared to the very strong binding of
>    the "long" which also designates a C type, and
>    long is Some Object, not a type itself.

What is exactly "syscall long".  Is it what the kernel understands 
internally as a long (which I guess doesn't necessarily match with what 
userspace understands as long)?  I'm not so used to kernel details...

> 
> You may prefer sth like I[syscall] B[long]
> (which I'd say is slightly worse because the whole point is that the
>   syscall long is not long on X32, so the long is not literal),
> but having them both be I would be misleading.

That makes sense.

Thanks,

Alex

> 
> Best,
> наб

-- 
Alejandro Colomar
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]