From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org>,
openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2][RFC] ipmi: Update timespec usage to timespec64
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 22:12:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2142273.XSm0MMUjAB@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1420663910-6406-2-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org>
On Wednesday 07 January 2015 12:51:50 John Stultz wrote:
> As part of the internal y2038 cleanup, this patch removes
> timespec usage in the ipmi driver, replacing it timespec64
>
> Cc: Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org>
> Cc: openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Signed-off-by: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
>
In other drivers, we tended to use ktime_t and monotonic time,
but your approach is definitely simpler because it doesn't have
to rework the ipmi_si_is_busy logic and just do a
s/timespec/timespec64/ conversion.
Do you think it makes sense to use ktime_get_ts64 instead of
getnstimeofday64 to get a monotonic time? The advantage would
be to have the code work slightly better when racing against
settimeofday, the downside would be that the debug printk
shows the changed time base, but that would hopefully be
irrelevant to someone debugging the code.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-07 21:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-07 20:51 [PATCH 1/2][RFC] ipmi: Cleanup DEBUG_TIMING ifdef usage John Stultz
2015-01-07 20:51 ` [PATCH 2/2][RFC] ipmi: Update timespec usage to timespec64 John Stultz
2015-01-07 21:12 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2015-01-07 21:22 ` John Stultz
2015-01-07 22:24 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ipmi: Cleanup DEBUG_TIMING ifdef usage John Stultz
2015-01-07 22:24 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] ipmi: Update timespec usage to timespec64 John Stultz
2015-01-09 22:52 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ipmi: Cleanup DEBUG_TIMING ifdef usage Corey Minyard
2015-01-09 23:57 ` John Stultz
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=2142273.XSm0MMUjAB@wuerfel \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=minyard@acm.org \
--cc=openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net \
/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.