On 15 July 2015 at 19:55, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 15 Jul 2015, Baolin Wang wrote: > >> On 15 July 2015 at 18:31, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Wed, 15 Jul 2015, Baolin Wang wrote: >> > >> >> The cputime_to_timespec() and timespec_to_cputime() functions are >> >> not year 2038 safe on 32bit systems due to that the struct timepsec >> >> will overflow in 2038 year. >> > >> > And how is this relevant? cputime is not based on wall clock time at >> > all. So what has 2038 to do with cputime? >> > >> > We want proper explanations WHY we need such a change. >> >> When converting the posix-cpu-timers, it call the >> cputime_to_timespec() function. Thus it need a conversion for this >> function. > > There is no requirement to convert posix-cpu-timers on their own. We > need to adopt the posix cpu timers code because it shares syscalls > with the other posix timers, but that still does not explain why we > need these functions. > In posix-cpu-timers, it also defined some 'k_clock struct' variables, and we need to convert the callbacks of the 'k_clock struct' which are not year 2038 safe on 32bit systems. Some callbacks which need to convert call the cputime_to_timespec() function, thus we also want to convert the cputime_to_timespec() function to a year 2038 safe function to make all them ready for the year 2038 issue. >> You can see that conversion in patch "posix-cpu-timers: Convert to >> y2038 safe callbacks" from >> https://git.linaro.org/people/baolin.wang/upstream_0627.git. > > I do not care about your random git tree. I care about proper > changelogs. Your changelogs are just a copied boilerplate full of > errors. > > Thanks, > > tglx -- Baolin.wang Best Regards -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
