On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 03:50:45PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 April 2015 13:07:44 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
...
> select, old_selct, pselect6: deprecated
Small, copy&paste error here for pselect6.
Luc
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxpp
On Wednesday 22 April 2015 16:54:32 Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 03:50:45PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > time, stime, gettimeofday, settimeofday, adjtimex, nanosleep,
> > getitimer, setitimer:
> > all deprecated => wontfix
>
> If adjtimex is deprecated, what will replace it
On Wednesday 22 April 2015 17:14:47 Luc Van Oostenryck wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 03:50:45PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 22 April 2015 13:07:44 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> ...
> > select, old_selct, pselect6: deprecated
>
> Small, copy&paste error here for pselect6.
>
Right, th
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 03:50:45PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> time, stime, gettimeofday, settimeofday, adjtimex, nanosleep,
> getitimer, setitimer:
> all deprecated => wontfix
If adjtimex is deprecated, what will replace it? It is really
important for ntp.
Thanks,
Richard
__
On Wednesday 22 April 2015 13:07:44 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> I've started a list of affected syscalls at
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HCYwHXxs48TsTb6IGUduNjQnmfRvMPzCN6T_0YiQwis/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Still adding more calls and description, let me know if you want edit
> permissions.
On Wed, 22 Apr 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 April 2015 10:45:23 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > So we could save one translation step if we implement new syscalls
> > which have a scalar nsec interface instead of the timespec/timeval
> >
On Wednesday 22 April 2015 10:45:23 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So we could save one translation step if we implement new syscalls
> which have a scalar nsec interface instead of the timespec/timeval
> cruft and let user space do the translation to whatev
From: Thomas Gleixner
> Sent: 22 April 2015 09:45
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > I know there are concerns about this, in particular because C11 and
> > > POSIX both require tv_nsec to be 'long', unlike timeval->tv_usec,
> > > which
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:45:23AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So we could save one translation step if we implement new syscalls
> which have a scalar nsec interface instead of the timespec/timeval
> cruft and let user space do the translation to whatever it wants.
+1
> I personally would we
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > I know there are concerns about this, in particular because C11 and
> > POSIX both require tv_nsec to be 'long', unlike timeval->tv_usec,
> > which is a 'suseconds_t' and can be defined as 'long long'.
> >
>
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> I know there are concerns about this, in particular because C11 and
> POSIX both require tv_nsec to be 'long', unlike timeval->tv_usec,
> which is a 'suseconds_t' and can be defined as 'long long'.
>
> a)
>
> struct timespec {
> time_t tv_sec;
>
On Tuesday 21 April 2015 17:13:32 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 April 2015 16:14:26 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > Note the use of a separate __kernel_itimerspec64 for the user interface
> > > > here, which I think will be needed to hide the di
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 April 2015 16:14:26 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > Note the use of a separate __kernel_itimerspec64 for the user interface
> > > here, which I think will be needed to hide the differences between the
> > > normal itimerspec on 64-bit machines,
On Tuesday 21 April 2015 16:14:26 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Note the use of a separate __kernel_itimerspec64 for the user interface
> > here, which I think will be needed to hide the differences between the
> > normal itimerspec on 64-bit machines, and the new itimerspec on 32-bit
> > platforms th
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE2(timer_gettime, timer_t, timer_id,
> >struct compat_itimerspec __user *, setting)
>
> As a side note, I want to kill off the get_fs()/set_fs() calls in
> the process. These always make me dizzy when I try t
On Monday 20 April 2015 22:40:57 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015, Baolin Wang wrote:
> > @@ -771,6 +771,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(timer_gettime, timer_t, timer_id,
> > struct itimerspec __user *, setting)
> > {
> > struct itimerspec cur_setting;
> > + struct itimerspec64
16 matches
Mail list logo
