From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7781AC4338F for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 09:02:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50E8160EE7 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 09:02:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234061AbhHIJCa (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Aug 2021 05:02:30 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54192 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234085AbhHIJC3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Aug 2021 05:02:29 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-x22c.google.com (mail-oi1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::22c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC21FC0613CF for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 02:02:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id be20so3691439oib.8 for ; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 02:02:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=wo+qc87Uy3jRgc6WnTXn+ty/u+Fnx55YTbnjcFCCGig=; b=cNBdWRzn7YhCA7KC/J5ZQOCvZnrZOZ96v8nC8qBXs/iqa3A/c1Q+xpXPjfXyUuhHsc FByPg425C48EHbAUH6GxL44pArHIL5uCc9acYYIDhc4+QMzeT63tfhWZfIZHOG4yAkgN wcaCfvPKz+3kX+dYtooTmnOv05ZjNDB9HM2MXCaGvoW7Lu+RpMlJZ557+Iz82Qwi2IMe ojWqC8by+WGW9x1f3dAB+vUdtAhOzSTCpVqJ0RgDJzsf4tkYaTgh0fK3heko0Wx4HSgj z12tYnRJ05URCnrN5N7nkutrWM8QRn0/lolKy0tEuKDTlGiSIat7XCZhyhtrDxpbv5X5 yLqA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wo+qc87Uy3jRgc6WnTXn+ty/u+Fnx55YTbnjcFCCGig=; b=EUdtM/jKskE9EW0bf0F6+WCnIvyPO9IDvRVdtbUnsS7cGneb+ZVa6/1i7feoXsX1ar VfRt9QzrzGRMVFU4CWHdyCD3jN2UKq3yeEGW0qAmW6v9N/4W+HE8tRfDaeqaaF4KaA9T XRt2EDAc/nCsL6wNH9kTibRRQAkLouwu95dVRKj4+C9eUPTTHFwM3PCJ/HOBnkV+GdJL +BaAlEu8cH0Bmayc5CNqocFICWw8KO0IYyRzy5GvNaBpZJbtqTD1mfgVJJEsOCpTdOuW 3JfApIWYo9Xk7Q76Wv28XSUM4Y1bvbAdt6HWSb5sn0MTpmHKTKekbfv8P7crTnhs+em5 lMSg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531uzE0pOJLztxjRvvIdTeI7vrGgBlHnuOJmiQvyTsK0A3ZKADJG +Yjgv8YBaqYaX/h8202yDGr1dBJmMb2bK7GWUbw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxX+YcXZQiKx4VQtb8h9OzbA3XHeyAjZztdGnBgONLIWozR0+kIGEBUr/YMcE/sMq2yk7vistHUEWqgT6MAu+8= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:250:: with SMTP id m16mr3080719oie.148.1628499728187; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 02:02:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210808084133.734274-1-alx.manpages@gmail.com> <20210808084133.734274-7-alx.manpages@gmail.com> <8560b628-c57e-eff6-ee59-34ac12d2b74d@gmail.com> <87wnovxcev.fsf@kurt> In-Reply-To: <87wnovxcev.fsf@kurt> Reply-To: mtk.manpages@gmail.com From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 11:01:56 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/23] futex.2: Document FUTEX_LOCK_PI2 To: Kurt Kanzenbach Cc: Alejandro Colomar , linux-man , Thomas Gleixner Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 10:14, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote: > > Hi Michael, > > On Mon Aug 09 2021, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > >> +.IP > >> +If > >> +.I timeout > >> +is not NULL, the structure it points to specifies > >> +an absolute timeout. > >> +If > >> +.I timeout > >> +is NULL, the operation can block indefinitely. > > > > The above is the same as FUTEX_LOCK_PI, right? So, it > > probably doesn't need repeating. > > > > I've reworked this description to be: > > > > FUTEX_LOCK_PI2 (since Linux 5.14) > > This operation is the same as FUTEX_LOCK_PI, except that > > the clock against which timeout is measured is selectable. > > By default, the (absolute) timeout specified in timeout is > > measured againt the CLOCK_MONOTONIC clock, but if the > > FUTEX_CLOCK_REALTIME flag is specified in futex_op, then > > the timeout is measured against the CLOCK_REALTIME clock. > > > > Is it okay? > > Sounds good. Okay. Thanks. Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/