Re: [Y2038] [PATCH 04/11] posix timers:Introduce the 64bit methods with timespec64 type for k_clock structure
From: Richard Cochran
Date: Wed Apr 22 2015 - 06:11:31 EST
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:45:23AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So we could save one translation step if we implement new syscalls
> which have a scalar nsec interface instead of the timespec/timeval
> cruft and let user space do the translation to whatever it wants.
+1
> I personally would welcome such an interface as it makes user space
> programming simpler. Just (re)arming a periodic nanosleep based on
> absolute expiry time is horrible stupid today:
Jup.
> Thoughts?
Current user space example: The linuxptp programs are doing ns64 to
timespec conversions to call into the kernel, which then does timespec
to ns64 to talk to the hardware. I would bet that most (all?) use
cases are better served with 64 bit nanosecond system calls.
Thanks,
Richard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/