[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87zftzzhfv.ffs@tglx>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 00:02:28 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>, LKML
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, John Stultz
<jstultz@...gle.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar
<mingo@...nel.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Eric Biederman
<ebiederm@...ssion.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V2 11/50] posix-cpu-timers: Handle SIGEV_NONE timers
correctly in timer_set()
On Thu, Apr 11 2024 at 17:48, Anna-Maria Behnsen wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> writes:
>
>> Expired SIGEV_NONE oneshot timers must return 0 nsec for the expiry time in
>> timer_get(), but the posix CPU timer implementation returns 1 nsec.
>
> copy paste error (get/set) ?
Yes.
>> Add the missing conditional.
>>
>> This will be cleaned up in a follow up patch.
>
> I'm confused. Why do you want to cleanup the conditional in a follow up
> patch?
This patch is to fix the issue. The next one consolidates the code, but
I can see why the "this will be ..." part of the changelog does not make
sense.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists