public inbox for linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
To: Mathura_Kumar <academic1mathura@gmail.com>, brauner@kernel.org
Cc: academic1mathura@gmail.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v2 1/4]IPC: Added New system call do_mq_timedreceive2() for non-destructive peek on posix mqueue
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2026 14:02:15 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a4vpm6go.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260320052340.6696-2-academic1mathura@gmail.com>

Mathura_Kumar <academic1mathura@gmail.com> writes:

> +SYSCALL_DEFINE5(mq_timedreceive2, mqd_t, mqdes,
> +		struct mq_timedreceive2_args __user *, uargs, unsigned int,
> +		flags, const unsigned long, index,
> +		const struct __kernel_timespec __user *, u_abs_timeout)

So the pattern that seems to have emerged when creating this kind of
argument structure for system calls is to pass the size of the structure
itself as an argument.  That allows the structure to be expanded in
compatible ways in the future, so you won't have to do
mq_timedreceive3().  Is there a reason you didn't do it that way here?

Thanks,

jon

  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-30 20:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-20  5:23 [PATCH RESEND v2 0/4] Add new system call for non-destructive peek and inspection to posix ipc mqueue Mathura_Kumar
2026-03-20  5:23 ` [PATCH RESEND v2 1/4]IPC: Added New system call do_mq_timedreceive2() for non-destructive peek on posix mqueue Mathura_Kumar
2026-03-30 20:02   ` Jonathan Corbet [this message]
2026-03-31 16:17   ` Jonathan Corbet
2026-03-20  5:23 ` [PATCH RESEND v2 2/4]IPC: Added system call number in all most common arch Mathura_Kumar
2026-03-20  5:23 ` [PATCH RESEND v2 3/4]IPC: Prepared Documentation and test Mathura_Kumar
2026-03-20  5:23 ` [PATCH RESEND v2 4/4]IPC:Added entry in performance tools for new system call Mathura_Kumar

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=87a4vpm6go.fsf@trenco.lwn.net \
    --to=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=academic1mathura@gmail.com \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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