Re: [PATCH 0/5] y2038 conversion for ntp/pps and sfc driver

2015-10-01 Thread John Stultz
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, David Miller wrote: >> From: Arnd Bergmann >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 22:21:27 +0200 >> >> > When trying to build a kernel with time_t commented out, I found that >> > the ntp subsystem still relies on timespec for

Re: [PATCH 0/5] y2038 conversion for ntp/pps and sfc driver

2015-10-01 Thread John Stultz
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, David Miller wrote: >> From: Arnd Bergmann >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 22:21:27 +0200 >> >> > When trying to build a kernel with time_t commented out, I found that >> > the ntp

Re: [PATCH 0/5] y2038 conversion for ntp/pps and sfc driver

2015-09-30 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, David Miller wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann > Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 22:21:27 +0200 > > > When trying to build a kernel with time_t commented out, I found that > > the ntp subsystem still relies on timespec for its pps handling. > > > > This series addresses this and converts

Re: [PATCH 0/5] y2038 conversion for ntp/pps and sfc driver

2015-09-30 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, David Miller wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann > Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 22:21:27 +0200 > > > When trying to build a kernel with time_t commented out, I found that > > the ntp subsystem still relies on timespec for its pps handling. > > > > This series addresses

Re: [PATCH 0/5] y2038 conversion for ntp/pps and sfc driver

2015-09-29 Thread David Miller
From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 22:21:27 +0200 > When trying to build a kernel with time_t commented out, I found that > the ntp subsystem still relies on timespec for its pps handling. > > This series addresses this and converts all the code to use timespec64 > instead, step by

Re: [PATCH 0/5] y2038 conversion for ntp/pps and sfc driver

2015-09-29 Thread Richard Cochran
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:21:27PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > When trying to build a kernel with time_t commented out, I found that > the ntp subsystem still relies on timespec for its pps handling. > > This series addresses this and converts all the code to use timespec64 > instead, step by

Re: [PATCH 0/5] y2038 conversion for ntp/pps and sfc driver

2015-09-29 Thread David Miller
From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 22:21:27 +0200 > When trying to build a kernel with time_t commented out, I found that > the ntp subsystem still relies on timespec for its pps handling. > > This series addresses this and converts all the code to use timespec64 >

Re: [PATCH 0/5] y2038 conversion for ntp/pps and sfc driver

2015-09-29 Thread Richard Cochran
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:21:27PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > When trying to build a kernel with time_t commented out, I found that > the ntp subsystem still relies on timespec for its pps handling. > > This series addresses this and converts all the code to use timespec64 > instead, step by

[PATCH 0/5] y2038 conversion for ntp/pps and sfc driver

2015-09-28 Thread Arnd Bergmann
When trying to build a kernel with time_t commented out, I found that the ntp subsystem still relies on timespec for its pps handling. This series addresses this and converts all the code to use timespec64 instead, step by step. There is one device driver that interacts with this code directly

[PATCH 0/5] y2038 conversion for ntp/pps and sfc driver

2015-09-28 Thread Arnd Bergmann
When trying to build a kernel with time_t commented out, I found that the ntp subsystem still relies on timespec for its pps handling. This series addresses this and converts all the code to use timespec64 instead, step by step. There is one device driver that interacts with this code directly