On 24/6/19 0:56, Florian Westphal wrote: >> @@ -254,6 +255,28 @@ void nft_meta_get_eval(const struct nft_expr *expr, >> goto err; >> strncpy((char *)dest, out->rtnl_link_ops->kind, IFNAMSIZ); >> break; >> + case NFT_META_TIME: >> + d64 = (s64 *) dest; >> + *d64 = get_seconds(); > > Nit; why limit this to 1 second granularity and not use > ktime_get_real_ns() here instead? > > I don't mind, we could add NFT_META_TIME_NS if needed. > I don't think this would make sense. Would require statements such as "meta time 1562005920098458691". That is totally unfriendly to the end user. But maybe I didn't understand what you meant here. Maybe you meant to replace get_seconds() with ktime_get_real_ns(), and divide the result by 10e-9 to get seconds? Would that get better precision? > Otherwise, this looks good to me. > We could also split nft_meta_get_eval and add nft_meta_get_time_eval() > to avoid increasing size of that function but its not a huge deal > and could be done later anyway. >
Attachment:
pEpkey.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
