From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Subject: Re: The time(2) man page conflicts with glibc Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 15:07:46 +0100 Message-ID: <56717032.7000007@gmail.com> References: <5671696B.3070203@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-man-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, Andreas Schwab , libc-alpha , linux-man , Mike Frysinger , Zack Weinberg List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org On 12/16/2015 02:53 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) > wrote: >> On 12/15/2015 03:17 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Andreas Schwab wr= ote: >>>> In which way does it conflict? >>> >>> On error, ((time_t) -1) is returned, and errno is set appropriately= =2E >> >> >> So, how would the following text be for the man page? >> >> ERRORS >> EFAULT t points outside your accessible address space. On = sys=E2=80=90 >> tems where the C library time() wrapper function inv= okes >> an implementation provided by the vdso(7) (so that t= here >> is no trap into the kernel), an invalid address = may >> instead trigger a SIGSEGV signal. >> >=20 > time never sets errno. You can't tell if it returns error when time > in libc.a is used. Yes, but the raw system call can give us EFAULT. That needs to be documented. By the way, what's the reason that one can't tell if it returns=20 an error when time() in libc.a is used? Thanks, Michael --=20 Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html