From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Cc: outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com,
Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@gmail.com>,
linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, y2038@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] firewire: Replace timeval with timespec64
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:17:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8039151.bl38b7tgr4@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151022150750.37602576@kant>
On Thursday 22 October 2015 15:07:50 Stefan Richter wrote:
> Looks fine to me, but I have a question. It was possibly already
> discussed at patch v1, though that was apparently not posted to an open
> list.
>
> include/linux/timekeeping.h says:
> #define ktime_get_real_ts64(ts) getnstimeofday64(ts)
>
> kernel/time/timekeeping.c says:
> /**
> * do_gettimeofday - Returns the time of day in a timeval
> * @tv: pointer to the timeval to be set
> *
> * NOTE: Users should be converted to using getnstimeofday()
> */
>
> So what is the reason for calling ktime_get_real_ts64() instead of
> getnstimeofday[64]()?
They are identical in behavior, I don't know exactly why we have two
but I'm advocating the move to ktime_* functions for consistency
with ktime_get_seconds(), ktime_get_ns() and ktime_get() that don't
have another alias. Once all users of the old getnstimeofday()
and do_gettimeofday() have been converted, I might change over all
users of getnstimeofday64() to ktime_get_real_ts64() and remove
all of the get*timeofday*() family.
> PS, note to self:
> Independently of this patch, I need to check whether CLOCK_REALTIME was
> really the right clock here, in contrast to CLOCK_MONOTONIC.
Yes, good idea. I usually recommend changing to montonic time
(ktime_get_ts64()) in the same patch, but in this particular case that
would have been a user-visible change that we should not mix in
to a single commit.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-22 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-21 22:35 [PATCH v2] firewire: Replace timeval with timespec64 Amitoj Kaur Chawla
2015-10-21 22:58 ` [Outreachy kernel] " Arnd Bergmann
2015-10-22 13:07 ` Stefan Richter
2015-10-22 13:17 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2015-11-05 13:34 ` [Outreachy kernel] " Stefan Richter
2015-11-05 14:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
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=8039151.bl38b7tgr4@wuerfel \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=amitoj1606@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com \
--cc=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox