[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:51:26 +0000
From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>, <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] timekeeping: introduce __current_kernel_time64
On Tue, 10 Nov 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Nov 2015, John Stultz wrote:
> > I'm sort of objecting to a different issue, where the
> > __current_kernel_time() implementation probably shouldn't be grabbing
> > the tk_core.timekeeper directly, and instead should take a passed
> > pointer to a timekeeper. The vdso/pv_clock usage should have a
> > timekeeper passed to them that they could use.
>
> That usage of __current_kernel_time() in that xen notifier is silly to
> begin with. The notifier gets already called with a pointer to the
> time keeper. That xen implementation just does not use it.
>
> We extract exactly that information in the vdso updates without
> calling back into the core code. So for solving that xen thing we do
> not need a 64 bit variant of __current_kernel_time() at all. The
> notifier has the pointer to the timekeeper and can just grab data from
> there.
Many thanks for the suggestion, I'll do that.
Should I open code tk_xtime in the xen notifier, or should I export it
in timekeeper_internal.h?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists