From: knewsgroup@gmail.com (K K)
To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org
Subject: Does the mq_timedreceive() fully implement the POSIX specification?
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:07:02 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEv6XceZQibb7srVDHYcDDHLUuDL4HS8xu7FqOa45Cp3OujbpQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1329123064.25984.303.camel@thorin>
Hi Bernd,
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Bernd Petrovitsch <
bernd@petrovitsch.priv.at> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:30 +0800, K K wrote:
> [....]
> > I am doing POSIX test on linux. And for mq_timedreceive() in POSIX spec
> > 2008 Issue 7, Line 43787:
> >
> > The validity of the abstime parameter need not be checked if a
> > message can be removed from the message queue immediately.
> >
> > But when I run test case mq_timedreceive/10-2 of POSIX suite (can be
> viewed
> > at :
> >
> http://ltp.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=ltp/ltp.git;a=blob;f=testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/mq_timedreceive/10-2.c;h=49ee4f243fc5046a965a551650d8697217faac35;hb=HEAD
> ),
> > mq_timedreceive() could get the message without wait, but the timeout is
> > still validated.
> >
> > Do we intend to do so, or the implementation needs update?
>
> I'm not a native English speaker but there is IMHO no problem as the
> above quoted part of POSIX simply does not require the check in that
> case. But it doesn't forbid the check.
>
That's my misunderstanding.
Thanks for your reply.
Regards,
Kai
>
> Bernd
> --
> Bernd Petrovitsch Email : bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at
> LUGA : http://www.luga.at
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20120214/b84a6c39/attachment.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-14 2:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-13 2:30 Does the mq_timedreceive() fully implement the POSIX specification? K K
2012-02-13 8:51 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2012-02-14 2:07 ` K K [this message]
2012-02-14 6:44 ` K K
2012-02-14 12:27 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAEv6XceZQibb7srVDHYcDDHLUuDL4HS8xu7FqOa45Cp3OujbpQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=knewsgroup@gmail.com \
--cc=kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).