Re: Does the mq_timedreceive() fully implement the POSIX specification?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



Hi Bernd,

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi!

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:30 +0800, K K wrote:
[....]
> I am doing POSIX test on linux. And for mq_timedreceive() in POSIX spec
> 2008 Issue 7, Line 43787:
>
>   The validity of the abstime parameter need not be checked if a
>   message can be removed from the message queue immediately.
>
> But when I run test case mq_timedreceive/10-2 of POSIX suite (can be viewed
> at :
> http://ltp.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=ltp/ltp.git;a=blob;f=testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/mq_timedreceive/10-2.c;h=49ee4f243fc5046a965a551650d8697217faac35;hb=HEAD),
> mq_timedreceive() could get the message without wait, but the timeout is
> still validated.
>
> Do we intend to do so, or the implementation needs update?

I'm not a native English speaker but there is IMHO no problem as the
above quoted part of POSIX simply does not require the check in that
case. But it doesn't forbid the check.

That's my misunderstanding.
Thanks for your reply.

Regards,
Kai

 

       Bernd
--
Bernd Petrovitsch                  Email : bernd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                    LUGA : http://www.luga.at


_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

[Newbies FAQ]     [Linux Kernel Mentors]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [IETF Annouce]     [Git]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Networking]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ACPI]

Add to Google Powered by Linux