On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 12:05:06 PM CEST John Stultz wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Stephan Mueller <smueller@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Am Dienstag, 21. Juni 2016, 11:11:42 schrieb John Stultz:
>> >
>> > Hi John,
>> >
>> >> I don't see in the above an explanation of *why* you're using
>> >> ktime_get_raw_ns() instead of ktime_get_ns().
>> >
>> > Could you help me understand what the difference is or point me to some
>> > documentation? I understood that we only talked about the _raw variant.
>>
>> Using specialized interfaces with subtle semantics w/o understanding
>> them is sort of my concern here.
>>
>> There are reasons why you might want to use the ktime_get_raw_ns()
>> interface over ktime_get_ns(), but they have not been made clear in
>> the comment. Arnd discussed some potential concerns that the freq
>> adjustment done by ntp might be somewhat predictable/controlled by
>> remote parties, which could have some effect in the calculation. That
>> feels a little overly vague to me, but I'm no crypto expert, so if
>> that is a reasonable concern, then it should be a conscious and
>> documented decision.
>
> My original patch changed __getnstimeofday() to __getnstimeofday64(),
> which kept the original semantics of not warning in case the clock
> source is suspended (which is the only different to the normal
> getnstimeofday{,64}().
>
> I did the patch a while time ago along with a number of other patches
> that I never sent out until last week, so I don't remember the
> reasoning for suggesting ktime_get_raw_fast_ns() over ktime_get_raw_ns(),
> but I sure wanted to keep the non-warning behavior, and ktime_get_ns()
> warns on timekeeping_suspended() while the other two don't.
Right. But this code isn't called in late suspend or early resume is it?
> If we don't care about the non-warning aspect, ktime_get_ns() makes
> most sense here, and the original code should probably have used
> getnstimeofday() as well.
This is what I suspect as well. But again, I don't mind if folks use
the specialized interfaces, as long as they document a clear reason
for it. Especially for things like crypto where intuition isn't always
the best guide.
thanks
-john
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
