From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261361AbVCaLgc (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:36:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261364AbVCaLgb (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:36:31 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:58797 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261361AbVCaLgW (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:36:22 -0500 Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:36:21 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andi Kleen , blaisorblade@yahoo.it, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] x86_64: remove duplicated sys_time64 Message-ID: <20050331113621.GP1623@wotan.suse.de> References: <20050330173216.426CFEFECF@zion> <20050331103834.GC1623@wotan.suse.de> <20050331211059.0ddc078c.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20050331111235.GL1623@wotan.suse.de> <20050331212516.64506156.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050331212516.64506156.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 09:25:16PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:12:35 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 09:10:59PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:38:34 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > > > > Nack. The generic sys_time still writes to int, not long. > > > > That is why x86-64 has a private one. Please keep that. > > > > > > It writes to a time_t which is a __kernel_time_t which is a long on > > > x86-64, isn't it? > > > > At least in 2.6.10 it writes to int. > > I was looking at current bk where it looks like this: > > asmlinkage long sys_time(time_t __user * tloc) Ok with that change the patch is ok. > { > time_t i; > struct timeval tv; > > do_gettimeofday(&tv); > i = tv.tv_sec; > > if (tloc) { > if (put_user(i,tloc)) > i = -EFAULT; > } > return i; > } > > I have no idea when it changed. I was looking at an older tree, sorry. -Andi