Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] Introduce current_time() api

2016-09-27 Thread Al Viro 
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 09:45:55AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Deepa Dinamani  
> wrote:
> > The series is aimed at getting rid of CURRENT_TIME and CURRENT_TIME_SEC 
> > macros.
> > The macros are not y2038 safe. There is no plan to transition them into 
> > being
> > y2038 safe.
> 
> This version looks ok to me.
> 
> Al, would you be willing to queue this up for 4.9?

Applied.

Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] Introduce current_time() api

2016-09-27 Thread Al Viro 
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 09:45:55AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Deepa Dinamani  
> wrote:
> > The series is aimed at getting rid of CURRENT_TIME and CURRENT_TIME_SEC 
> > macros.
> > The macros are not y2038 safe. There is no plan to transition them into 
> > being
> > y2038 safe.
> 
> This version looks ok to me.
> 
> Al, would you be willing to queue this up for 4.9?

Applied.

Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] Introduce current_time() api

2016-09-14 Thread Linus Torvalds 
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Deepa Dinamani  wrote:
> The series is aimed at getting rid of CURRENT_TIME and CURRENT_TIME_SEC 
> macros.
> The macros are not y2038 safe. There is no plan to transition them into being
> y2038 safe.

This version looks ok to me.

Al, would you be willing to queue this up for 4.9?

Linus

Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] Introduce current_time() api

2016-09-14 Thread Linus Torvalds 
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Deepa Dinamani  wrote:
> The series is aimed at getting rid of CURRENT_TIME and CURRENT_TIME_SEC 
> macros.
> The macros are not y2038 safe. There is no plan to transition them into being
> y2038 safe.

This version looks ok to me.

Al, would you be willing to queue this up for 4.9?

Linus