[PATCH] [RFC] y2038: nptl: Convert pthread_cond_{clock|timed}wait to support 64 bit time

[Adhemerval Zanella]

On 26/08/2020 14:59, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> Hi Adhemerval,
> [..]
> was recommended. Which indentation style is correct then? As the manual:
> https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html
> 
> did not say about it explicitly.
> 
> Also here:
> https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Style_and_Conventions
> 
> it is not said explicitly.
> 
> The only recommendation I had from Joseph on the very beginning of my
> involvement in the project:
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2019-March/102274.html

I usually follow current file practice of two-column indentation with
tab for 8 columns. But as Florian has added, new files could use
whitespace instead of tabs.

>>
>>> @@ -662,18 +676,32 @@ versioned_symbol (libpthread,
>>> __pthread_cond_timedwait, pthread_cond_timedwait, 
>>>  /* See __pthread_cond_wait_common.  */
>>>  int
>>> -__pthread_cond_clockwait (pthread_cond_t *cond, pthread_mutex_t
>>> *mutex,
>>> -			  clockid_t clockid,
>>> -			  const struct timespec *abstime)
>>> +__pthread_cond_clockwait64 (pthread_cond_t *cond, pthread_mutex_t
>>> *mutex,
>>> +                            clockid_t clockid,
>>> +                            const struct __timespec64 *abstime)
>>>  {
>>>    /* Check parameter validity.  This should also tell the compiler
>>> that it can assume that abstime is not NULL.  */
>>>    if (! valid_nanoseconds (abstime->tv_nsec))
>>>      return EINVAL;
>>>  
>>> -  if (!futex_abstimed_supported_clockid (clockid))
>>> +  if (! futex_abstimed_supported_clockid (clockid))
>>>      return EINVAL;  
>>
>> Gratuitous change.
> 
> Yes, this change is not related to this change. However, IIRC the if (!
> futex*...) for '!' (a space after it) is the correct coding style.

It not wrong indeed, but usually for style change it is better to send a 
separate patch.