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 <milosz@xxxxxxxxx> 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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
