2017-01-04 10:39 GMT+01:00 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 09:54:12AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> On Tue, 3 Jan 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >> > > Get rid of the union and just keep ktime_t as simple typedef of type s64. >> > >> > All good stuff. One question that remains is why keep the type while >> > removing the cycles_t type? >> >> That would have been a massive surgery which I was not able to pull off on >> top of the other changes. > > And the reason ktime needs be s64 is because 0 is at boot, and we need > to represent time before boot, right? Might want to stick that in a > comment somewhere near that typedef, so I don't keep asking this ;-) Aaah, that confused me as well :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|