linux-kernel - Re: clock_gettime

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANcMJZAi_738t-eDUphC6U_25xFS0NqQqdUZAzu7Aijqmrj=wA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 4 Sep 2013 12:20:58 -0700
From:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:	Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kumar Sundararajan <kumar@...com>
Subject: Re: clock_gettime_ns

On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> I think that most of the hangup was a lack of agreement on how the API
> should work wrt leap seconds.

I don't recall this objection. The interface uses existing clockids,
so it probably should keep the existing leap-second behavior of those
clockids.

> I've always thought that the Right Way to represent a UTC time is
> nanoseconds since some epoch, where every potential leap second
> counts.

Check out the CLOCK_TAI clockid merged in 3.10.

thanks
-john
--
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/