From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mta1.formilux.org (mta1.formilux.org [51.159.59.229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E64E149C6F; Sun, 30 Nov 2025 10:42:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=51.159.59.229 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764499347; cv=none; b=nTGYLhUvk0uBZnBJbXIYDdmhX09/A/8JbYZfNvMOInk8NkEYE3MdlOtQ05G533cuu/qEvuDXfK376PgNRz4VAjKFLlIcjDn3/l1jJ8C6ly7vUAJApxuwIsyxIXf/2Qbm6Ptx3YS0YObFWeQckTC/zm9kFfvC9zg+6iuWyyiLE+k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764499347; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0ddfX5lIQPZLihRXIMcb7a8kEkCDpKD4a5Fq0hKBrwI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=e8jvbrSrmyGSkwS8vr2Yuj1oX3XjwRl1dz7apbk5sOZwpi/mEr08uJD8xG78QQXGvcZ+/ucAtYc+U0Zd313Nv+3msxRm3aczXIVGycXES1rUh6pSIz+GHga2vtiHh1CBgpHJiwIOxsmJL4mWUnL2mV38+J0rEE0YRl2kWyinAo0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=1wt.eu; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=1wt.eu; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=1wt.eu header.i=@1wt.eu header.b=FG8cAkfS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=51.159.59.229 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=1wt.eu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=1wt.eu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=1wt.eu header.i=@1wt.eu header.b="FG8cAkfS" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1wt.eu; s=mail; t=1764499342; bh=0ddfX5lIQPZLihRXIMcb7a8kEkCDpKD4a5Fq0hKBrwI=; h=From:Message-ID:From; b=FG8cAkfStxxq1DgOXnWTqfshDd5Q5qjQ+OceubIlnWWrYwymXVP6A25V0RWKxzkv3 JaH704o4/UAM49Xss20KOzjyrz7kFTIAy4uEwowzDUz7q2gK37FuoSuG51YA5G+SCs yNCJWt6Hw0dmnsxhXridPW2syjfcz+qDs4mXVGXw= Received: from 1wt.eu (ded1.1wt.eu [163.172.96.212]) by mta1.formilux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5D18C04AB; Sun, 30 Nov 2025 11:42:21 +0100 (CET) Received: (from willy@localhost) by pcw.home.local (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 5AUAgLiv032740; Sun, 30 Nov 2025 11:42:21 +0100 Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2025 11:42:21 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Wei=DFschuh?= Cc: Shuah Khan , Arnd Bergmann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] tools/nolibc/time: drop invocation of gettimeofday system call Message-ID: <20251130104221.GC31522@1wt.eu> References: <20251122-nolibc-uapi-types-v2-0-b814a43654f5@weissschuh.net> <20251122-nolibc-uapi-types-v2-4-b814a43654f5@weissschuh.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20251122-nolibc-uapi-types-v2-4-b814a43654f5@weissschuh.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 05:59:10PM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > This invocation uses libc types with a system call. While this works > now, upcoming changes to 'struct timeval' would require type > conversions. If types are converted anyways, the clock_gettime() based > fallback can be used everywhere, simplifying the code. I must confess I'm not happy to see the simple, lightweight and efficient gettimeofday() quit, with the alternative being a bit bigger, but after enough testing, aside the code size increase I cannot spot any problem. > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh Acked-by: Willy Tarreau Willy