From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
y2038@lists.linaro.org, Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>,
pang.xunlei@linaro.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
cl@linux.com, heenasirwani@gmail.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, ahh@google.com,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
pjt@google.com, riel@redhat.com,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
rth@twiddle.net, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
linux390@de.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Y2038] [PATCH 04/11] posix timers:Introduce the 64bit methods with timespec64 type for k_clock structure
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 12:11:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150422101114.GA5527@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1504220946460.13914@nanos>
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:45:23AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So we could save one translation step if we implement new syscalls
> which have a scalar nsec interface instead of the timespec/timeval
> cruft and let user space do the translation to whatever it wants.
+1
> I personally would welcome such an interface as it makes user space
> programming simpler. Just (re)arming a periodic nanosleep based on
> absolute expiry time is horrible stupid today:
Jup.
> Thoughts?
Current user space example: The linuxptp programs are doing ns64 to
timespec conversions to call into the kernel, which then does timespec
to ns64 to talk to the hardware. I would bet that most (all?) use
cases are better served with 64 bit nanosecond system calls.
Thanks,
Richard
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: pang.xunlei@linaro.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
cl@linux.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
heenasirwani@gmail.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, y2038@lists.linaro.org,
rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, ahh@google.com,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
pjt@google.com, riel@redhat.com, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
rth@twiddle.net, Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
linux390@de.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [Y2038] [PATCH 04/11] posix timers:Introduce the 64bit methods with timespec64 type for k_clock structure
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 12:11:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150422101114.GA5527@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1504220946460.13914@nanos>
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:45:23AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So we could save one translation step if we implement new syscalls
> which have a scalar nsec interface instead of the timespec/timeval
> cruft and let user space do the translation to whatever it wants.
+1
> I personally would welcome such an interface as it makes user space
> programming simpler. Just (re)arming a periodic nanosleep based on
> absolute expiry time is horrible stupid today:
Jup.
> Thoughts?
Current user space example: The linuxptp programs are doing ns64 to
timespec conversions to call into the kernel, which then does timespec
to ns64 to talk to the hardware. I would bet that most (all?) use
cases are better served with 64 bit nanosecond system calls.
Thanks,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-22 10:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 92+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-20 5:57 [PATCH 00/11] Convert the posix_clock_operations and k_clock structure to ready for 2038 Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 01/11] linux/time64.h:Introduce the 'struct itimerspec64' for 64bit Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 9:49 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2015-04-20 9:49 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2015-04-20 10:55 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 10:55 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 19:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-20 19:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-20 19:59 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-20 19:59 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-21 8:19 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-21 8:19 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 02/11] timekeeping:Introduce the current_kernel_time64() function with timespec64 type Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 03/11] time/hrtimer:Introduce hrtimer_get_res64() with timespec64 type for getting the timer resolution Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 19:15 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-20 19:15 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 04/11] posix timers:Introduce the 64bit methods with timespec64 type for k_clock structure Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 20:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-20 20:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-21 8:59 ` [Y2038] " Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 8:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 14:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-21 14:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-21 14:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 14:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 14:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 15:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-21 15:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-21 15:40 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 15:40 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 15:40 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 15:40 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 20:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-21 20:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-22 8:45 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-22 8:45 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-22 10:11 ` Richard Cochran [this message]
2015-04-22 10:11 ` Richard Cochran
2015-04-22 10:44 ` David Laight
2015-04-22 10:44 ` David Laight
2015-04-22 10:44 ` David Laight
2015-04-22 10:44 ` David Laight
2015-04-22 11:07 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-22 11:07 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-22 13:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-22 13:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-22 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-22 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-22 14:54 ` Richard Cochran
2015-04-22 14:54 ` Richard Cochran
2015-04-22 15:37 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-22 15:37 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-22 15:14 ` Luc Van Oostenryck
2015-04-22 15:14 ` Luc Van Oostenryck
2015-04-22 15:14 ` Luc Van Oostenryck
2015-04-22 15:38 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-22 15:38 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-22 15:38 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 05/11] time/posix-timers:Convert to the 64bit methods for k_clock callback functions Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 20:48 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-20 20:48 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-21 8:36 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-21 8:36 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-21 8:45 ` [Y2038] " Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 8:45 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 8:45 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-21 8:55 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-21 8:55 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 06/11] char/mmtimer:Convert to the 64bit methods for k_clock callback function Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 07/11] time/alarmtimer:Convert to the new methods for k_clock structure Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 08/11] time/posix-clock:Convert to the 64bit methods for k_clock and posix_clock_operations structure Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 09/11] cputime:Introduce the cputime_to_timespec64/timespec64_to_cputime function Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 21:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-20 21:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 10/11] time/posix-cpu-timers:Convert to the 64bit methods for k_clock structure Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` [PATCH 11/11] k_clock:Remove the 32bit methods with timespec type Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 5:57 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 8:42 ` Richard Cochran
2015-04-20 8:42 ` Richard Cochran
2015-04-20 9:00 ` Baolin Wang
2015-04-20 9:00 ` Baolin Wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150422101114.GA5527@localhost.localdomain \
--to=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=ahh@google.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=baolin.wang@linaro.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=heenasirwani@gmail.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux390@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pang.xunlei@linaro.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=y2038@lists.linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.