On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 10:55 AM Lucas Stach wrote:
> >
> > > If that's the case then we should never encounter a genuine 0 timeout
> > > and this change would be okay.
> >
> > That's quite likely, I'd say any program passing {0,0} as a timeout without
> > ETNA_WAIT_NONBLOCK is already broken,
On Sa, 2019-11-09 at 13:12 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 12:03 AM Lucas Stach wrote:
> > Am Freitag, den 08.11.2019, 22:32 +0100 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> > > struct timespec is being removed from the kernel because it often leads
> > > to code that is not y2038-safe.
> > >
On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 12:03 AM Lucas Stach wrote:
>
> Am Freitag, den 08.11.2019, 22:32 +0100 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> > struct timespec is being removed from the kernel because it often leads
> > to code that is not y2038-safe.
> >
> > In the etnaviv driver, monotonic timestamps are used, which
Am Freitag, den 08.11.2019, 22:32 +0100 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> struct timespec is being removed from the kernel because it often leads
> to code that is not y2038-safe.
>
> In the etnaviv driver, monotonic timestamps are used, which do not suffer
> from overflow, but using ktime_t still leads
