On 28 April 2015 at 18:52, Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tuesday 28 April 2015 18:39:07 Baolin Wang wrote:
> > On 28 April 2015 at 17:42, Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > -     if (!new_clock->clock_get) {
> > > > -             printk(KERN_WARNING "POSIX clock id %d lacks
> > > clock_get()\n",
> > > > +     if (!new_clock->clock_get && !new_clock->clock_get64) {
> > > > +             printk(KERN_WARNING "POSIX clock id %d lacks
> clock_get()
> > > and clock_get64()\n",
> > > >                      clock_id);
> > > >               return;
> > > >       }
> > >
> > > Here you are missing a step that Thomas suggested in the previous
> review:
> > >
> > > add a default clock_get64() implementation that calls clock_get()
> > >
> > >
> > But the  default_timer_get64((struct k_clock *kc, struct k_itimer *timr,
> struct
> > itimerspec64 *cur_setting64)
> > function he suggested can't get the "kc" parameter, cause the "timer_get"
> > point prototype is
> > "void (*timer_get64) (struct k_itimer *timr, struct itimerspec64
> > *cur_setting);".
> >
> > static int default_timer_get64(struct k_clock *kc, struct k_itimer *timr,
> >                                struct itimerspec64 *cur_setting64)
> > {
> >         struct itimerspec cur_setting;
> >
> >         kc->timer_get(timer, &cur_setting);
> >         return 0;
> > }
> >
>
> This is something you should have asked in reply to Thomas' suggestion
> when you noticed this was a problem.
>
> I think the answer is that you must use clockid_to_kclock(timr->it_clock)
> to convert from a k_itimer structure to a k_clock structure.
>
> This is slightly inefficient, but it is only done in an intermediate
> step and gets removed in the final patch/
>
>         Arnd
>
>
Yes, I just saw the problem when i do here. And I'll add the conversion for
the
default function. Thanks for your suggestion.

-- 
Baolin.wang
Best Regards
_______________________________________________
Y2038 mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/y2038

Reply via email to