On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 03:28:49PM +0000, Pawel Moll wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-02-20 at 14:29 +0000, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > @@ -334,8 +335,7 @@ struct perf_event_attr {
> > */
> > __u32 sample_stack_user;
> >
> > - /* Align to u64. */
> > - __u32 __reserved_2;
> > + __u32 clockid;
>
> I thought about it, but was sort-of-afraid to propose it :-)
>
> Now, one thing I'm not 100% sure about it is it being unsigned, as
> clockid_t is signed for a reason (negative values have meaning - eg.
> dynamic clocks, which could be useful in some circumstances). Of course
> casting could be an answer, but is there any reason not to make it
> __s32?
I did not spot that significance and cannot find mention of it in
clock_gettime(2) either, but I've no objection to making it __s32.
> > + default:
> > + /* XXX add: clock_id_valid() && clock_gettime_ns() ? */
> > + err = -EINVAL;
> > + goto err_alloc;
> > + }
>
> If you asked me, I'd say -EINVAL, no default.
Yeah, I should probably restructure that a wee bit.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
