On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 01:52:05PM -0700, Deepa Dinamani wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 12:31:00PM -0700, Deepa Dinamani wrote: > > > >> 3. I was also aiming for user pointers to be not touched by timer > >> specific code as it can get messy if not handled properly with 2 > >> compat time_t versions. > > > > So have one helper that deals with all copyout and have it used by > > all of them. IMO all that code should treat userland representation > > as completely opaque. Just switch nanosleep_copyout() to take > > timespec64 instead of timespec (for kernel-side object) and that'll > > do it, wouldn't it? > > Yes, that would work. > If that is preferred, then I will just do that and rebase the patches. Please, do. Note that quite a few things in that series won't be needed anymore (e.g. compat syscalls are already moved to native ones, etc.). Might make sense to take it to #kernel - lower latency that way...
