[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1407730744.4508.67.camel@pasglop>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:19:04 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: john.stultz@...aro.org
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de, sfr@...b.auug.org.au,
linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
Subject: Re: [tip:timers/core] timekeeping: Fixup typo in
update_vsyscall_old definition
On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 00:31 -0700, tip-bot for John Stultz wrote:
> Commit-ID: 953dec21aed4038464fec02f96a2f1b8701a5bce
> Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/953dec21aed4038464fec02f96a2f1b8701a5bce
> Author: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
> AuthorDate: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 21:37:19 -0700
> Committer: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> CommitDate: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:26:25 +0200
>
> timekeeping: Fixup typo in update_vsyscall_old definition
>
> In commit 4a0e637738f0 ("clocksource: Get rid of cycle_last"),
> currently in the -tip tree, there was a small typo where cycles_t
> was used intstead of cycle_t. This broke ppc64 builds.
There's another bug in there... You fix timespec vs. timespec64 for the
first argument of update_vsyscall_old but not the second one ...
(wall_to_monotonic).
Also, in e2dff1ec0 you claim this is "minor", you seem to forget that
arch/powerpc also deals with 32-bit kernels which use the same time
keeping code, so we have a pretty serious regressions here...
BTW. Is there some documentation you can point me to to figure out what
replace that "_OLD" stuff so we can update to whatever is "new" ?
Cheers,
Ben.
--
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