Re: [PATCH 3/5] sysvipc: Consolidate semtimedop s390

[Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>]

* Adhemerval Zanella:

> diff --git a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/ipc_priv.h b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/ipc_priv.h
> index 65adbb093e..49018c1b28 100644
> --- a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/ipc_priv.h
> +++ b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/ipc_priv.h
> @@ -34,4 +34,7 @@ struct __old_ipc_perm
>  #define MSGRCV_ARGS(__msgp, __msgtyp) \
>    ((long int []){ (long int) __msgp, __msgtyp })
>  
> +#define SEMTIMEDOP_IPC_ARGS(__nsops, __sops, __timeout) \
> +  (__nsops), 0, (__sops), (__timeout)

Maybe add a reference to the s390 version?

> diff --git a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/s390/s390-32/ipc_priv.h b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/s390/s390-32/ipc_priv.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..9d74e92289

> +/* The s390 sys_ipc variant has only five parameters instead of six
> +   (as for default variant) and the only difference is the handling of
> +   SEMTIMEDOP where on s390 the third parameter is used as a pointer
> +   to a struct timespec where the generic variant uses fifth parameter.  */
> +#undef SEMTIMEDOP_IPC_ARGS
> +#define SEMTIMEDOP_IPC_ARGS(__nsops, __sops, __timeout) \
> +  (__nsops), (__timeout), (__sops)

I find “and the only difference is” a bit confusing here.  Maybe write
“.  The difference is” instead?

Rest of the patch looks okay to me.

Thanks,
Florian