On Thu, 8 Oct 2015, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 10:52:05AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Thursday 08 October 2015 08:23:44 Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > > The difference is that with the one-week step the kernel and userspace
> > > still agree on the current time and it is always valid from the kernel
> > > point of view, absolute timers can be set, etc.
> >
> > Ok, I can see that as an improvement, but it still seems to give
> > a false sense of safety, and I feel we really should not have any code
> > rely on this behavior.
>
> Applications are not allowed to rely on system time being sane?
> To me the current behavior looks like the kernel is throwing the
> applications off a cliff, while it's the only thing that can fly :).
As Arnd said, you are creating a wrong sense of safety. They fall off
the cliff with your changes as well. The fall is just different. Think
about timeouts, user space overflows of time_t etc.
We need to fix all of it, no matter what.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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/
