From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: use __kernel_timespec in timeout ABI Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 08:09:19 -0600 Message-ID: <8d5d34da-e1f0-1ab5-461e-f3145e52c48a@kernel.dk> References: <20190930202055.1748710-1-arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20190930202055.1748710-1-arnd@arndb.de> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: y2038@lists.linaro.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Viro , =?UTF-8?Q?Stefan_B=c3=bchler?= , Hannes Reinecke , Jackie Liu , Andrew Morton , Hristo Venev , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 9/30/19 2:20 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > All system calls use struct __kernel_timespec instead of the old struct > timespec, but this one was just added with the old-style ABI. Change it > now to enforce the use of __kernel_timespec, avoiding ABI confusion and > the need for compat handlers on 32-bit architectures. > > Any user space caller will have to use __kernel_timespec now, but this > is unambiguous and works for any C library regardless of the time_t > definition. A nicer way to specify the timeout would have been a less > ambiguous 64-bit nanosecond value, but I suppose it's too late now to > change that as this would impact both 32-bit and 64-bit users. Thanks for catching that, Arnd. Applied. -- Jens Axboe