linux-kernel - Re: [tip:timers/urgent] ktime: Get rid of the union

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: <20170104093919.GC25813@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2017 10:39:19 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
        linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:timers/urgent] ktime: Get rid of the union

On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 09:54:12AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jan 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > > Get rid of the union and just keep ktime_t as simple typedef of type s64.
> > 
> > All good stuff. One question that remains is why keep the type while
> > removing the cycles_t type?
> 
> That would have been a massive surgery which I was not able to pull off on
> top of the other changes.

And the reason ktime needs be s64 is because 0 is at boot, and we need
to represent time before boot, right? Might want to stick that in a
comment somewhere near that typedef, so I don't keep asking this ;-)