On Oct 22 Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 22 October 2015 04:05:00 Amitoj Kaur Chawla wrote: [...] > Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> > > (adding the y2038 mailing list as well) > > > Changes in v2: > > -Replaced timespec with timspec64 > > -Modified commit message > > -Used ktime_get_real_ts64() instead of getnstimeofday64() [...] > > --- a/drivers/firewire/nosy.c > > +++ b/drivers/firewire/nosy.c [...] > > @@ -413,17 +414,18 @@ static void > > packet_irq_handler(struct pcilynx *lynx) [...] > > - do_gettimeofday(&tv); > > - lynx->rcv_buffer[0] = (__force __le32)tv.tv_usec; > > + ktime_get_real_ts64(&ts64); > > + timestamp = ts64.tv_nsec / NSEC_PER_USEC; > > + lynx->rcv_buffer[0] = (__force __le32)timestamp;
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]()? 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. -- Stefan Richter -=====-===== =-=- =-==- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
