linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] perf: User/kernel time correlation and event generation

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]

Date:	Tue, 04 Nov 2014 17:11:47 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu@...euvizoso.net>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <mail@...elmoll.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] perf: User/kernel time correlation and event generation

On Tuesday 04 November 2014 11:49:04 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Richard Cochran wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 09:01:31AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Monday 03 November 2014 17:11:53 John Stultz wrote:
> > > > I've got some thoughts on what a possible interface that wouldn't be
> > > > awful could look like, but I'm still hesitant because I don't really
> > > > know if exposing this sort of data is actually a good idea long term.
> > >  
> > > I was also thinking (while working on an unrelated patch) we could use
> > > a system call like
> > > 
> > > int clock_getoffset(clockid_t clkid, struct timespec *offs);
> 
> We might make *offs a timespec64 or u64 

I don't think we are ready yet to introduce timespec64 in the uapi
headers, this needs some more careful planning. Otherwise I agree
it's bad to introduce syscalls that we already know will become
obsolete soon.

	Arnd
--
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/