On Monday, August 15, 2016 6:23:12 PM CEST Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 03:48:12PM -0700, 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
> >
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:18:52AM -0700, Deepa Dinamani wrote:
> Thank you for the suggestion.
>
> > Who are you execting to pull this huge patch series?
>
> The last pull request was addressed to Al as per Arnd's suggestion.
> I'm not completely sure who should it be addressed to.
>
> > Why
Thank you for the suggestion.
> Who are you execting to pull this huge patch series?
The last pull request was addressed to Al as per Arnd's suggestion.
I'm not completely sure who should it be addressed to.
> Why not just introduce the new api call, wait for that to be merged, and
> then push
On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 03:48:12PM -0700, 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.
> ktime_get_* api's can be used in their place. And,
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.
ktime_get_* api's can be used in their place. And, these are y2038 safe.
Thanks to Arnd Bergmann for all the guidance and
5 matches
Mail list logo