Hello Pavel,
On 04/27/2015 10:37 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> The FUTEX_WAIT_OP operation is equivalent to execute the
>> follow???
>> ing code atomically and totally ordered with respect to
>> other
>> futex operations on any of the two supplied futex words:
>
> "to executing"?
Yep. Fixed.
>> The operation and comparison that are to be performed
>> are
>> encoded in the bits of the argument val3. Pictorially,
>> the
>> encoding is:
>>
>> +---+---+-----------+-----------+
>> |op |cmp| oparg | cmparg |
>> +---+---+-----------+-----------+
>> 4 4 12 12 <== # of bits
>>
>
> :-)
>
>> RETURN VALUE
>> In the event of an error, all operations return -1 and set errno
>> to
>> indicate the cause of the error. The return value on success
>> depends
>> on the operation, as described in the following list:
>
> Did you say (at the begining) that there is no glibc wrapper?
Yes, this could be clearer. I changed it to
RETURN VALUE
In the event of an error (and assuming that futex() was invoked
via syscall(2)), all operations return -1 and set errno to indi‐
cate the cause of the error.
>> EINVAL The operation in futex_op is one of those that employs a
>> time???
>> out, but the supplied timeout argument was invalid (tv_sec
>> was
>> less than zero, or tv_nsec was not less than 1000,000,000).
>
> 1,000...?
Fixed.
Thanks for the comments!
Cheers,
Michael
--
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-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
