netdev - Re: [patch V2 17/26] timekeeping: Provide time getters for auxiliary clocks

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <874iwipz9i.ffs@tglx>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2025 09:18:17 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Richard
 Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>, Christopher Hall
 <christopher.s.hall@...el.com>, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
 Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>, Miroslav Lichvar
 <mlichvar@...hat.com>, Werner Abt <werner.abt@...nberg-usa.com>, David
 Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Thomas
 Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>, Kurt
 Kanzenbach
 <kurt@...utronix.de>, Nam Cao <namcao@...utronix.de>, Antoine Tenart
 <atenart@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V2 17/26] timekeeping: Provide time getters for
 auxiliary clocks

On Fri, Jun 13 2025 at 19:51, John Stultz wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 1:33 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>> +/**
>> + * ktime_get_aux - Get TAI time for a AUX clock
>
> Is this actually the TAI time? Wouldn't it be the MONOTONIC time for
> the AUX clock?

Of course not TAI. It's not monotonic either as it can be set. It's just
AUX clock time, whatever that means :)

>> + * @id:        ID of the clock to read (CLOCK_AUX...)
>> + * @kt:        Pointer to ktime_t to store the time stamp
>> + *
>> + * Returns: True if the timestamp is valid, false otherwise
>> + */
>> +bool ktime_get_aux(clockid_t id, ktime_t *kt)
>> +{
>> +       struct tk_data *tkd = aux_get_tk_data(id);
>> +       struct timekeeper *tk;
>
> Nit: Just to be super explicit, would it be good to name these aux_tk
> and aux_tkd?
> So it's more clear you're not working with the standard timekeeper?

Yes.