On 10/20/2014 11:42 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> Hello Milosz,
>
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:52 PM, Milosz Tanski <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Christoph and/or Jeff,
>>
>> I updated the patch for 3.18-rc1 and I'm going to resend it as non-RFC
>> as I didn't get comments last time.
>>
>> I only have one stupid question... I'm going to rename the calls to
>> preadv6 and pwritev6 (so it's more like the other syscalls: dup3,
>> accept4, eventfd2) but I'm not sure if i should call it preadv5 or
>> pwritev6 since the offset argument is split into two different
>> arguments (upper and lower part).
>
> It's points like this that show exactly why naming system calls after
> the number of their arguments is a very bad idea[1]. Please don't do
> it. pwritev2() and preadv2() are not pretty either, but are marginally
> better. pwritev_fl() and preadv_fl() (or simialr) might also be okay,
> I guess.
>
The splitting of the argument is a calling convention thing (and a
rather stupid one at that... we shouldn't do these kinds of things
manually.) As such, it is not visible to the user and should not be
counted.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
