linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] ptp/clcok:Introduce the setktime/getktime interfaces with "ktime

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150320062603.GC4417@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 20 Mar 2015 07:26:03 +0100
From:	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To:	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] ptp/clcok:Introduce the setktime/getktime interfaces
 with "ktime_t" type

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 09:54:05AM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
> Next patch series will contain all of the drivers which need to be changed.
> But i think the conditional in ptp_clock.c can still in there.

Why?

> Because our plan is once all the drivers are converted, i will remove the
> conditional, along with the original function pointer.
> Is that OK? Thanks!

I want to avoid a patch series that introduces something, only to
remove it later on.  Sometimes you have to do that way for a complex
transformation, but this case is rather simple.

You can change the gettime signature in one patch, and the settime in
a second patch.

Thanks,
Richard
--
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/