From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 151311F45F for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 16:19:01 +0000 (UTC) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; q=dns; s=default; b=x8LeWRkoddJPRK2FyvI+ofZTIjKQL7 8QXjFmhdkiq+tkfeJNdwrRQGIdeaADnQsDLFOmyo2hQMwmsPG9n6icQtcIn3Txz1 abe3tAzsTy1pn7yOkLSYOlZr1DYQN6+igRWkQ/ZojJD5jZ3oUCqVs9DkNU405+5+ YiFr/OFVd3aTc= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; s=default; bh=ukcrSgPFpNR9iCSwXn+LgMohF+A=; b=koHy KSvzYxHTx+8rf4Ee8o0dRI6UMI0Yx30rBks02yqMWeH4PXCmPvkllmc0cAD4K5sz VaNGaB2+oXgWomQcaSvU7FMGIQUUar9XRM6W0G8lriQtGsJXONRRrCrWrnPBU/zM fvfMKxk9y9U+RfMmj7EfWIeNSOHx1FeEFSTQ/HM= Received: (qmail 541 invoked by alias); 9 May 2019 16:18:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 532 invoked by uid 89); 9 May 2019 16:18:58 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-HELO: relay13.nicmail.ru Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 20:18:49 +0400 From: Stepan Golosunov To: Joseph Myers Cc: Lukasz Majewski , libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Arnd Bergmann , Paul Eggert Subject: Re: [PATCH] y2038: Introduce __ASSUME_TIME64_SYSCALLS define Message-ID: <20190509161848.n4xm4e4gitczysbz@sghpc.golosunov.pp.ru> References: <20190414220841.20243-1-lukma@denx.de> <20190508155608.24791-1-lukma@denx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) 09.05.2019 Χ 15:58:38 +0000 Joseph Myers ΞΑΠΙΣΑΜ: > On Wed, 8 May 2019, Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > + Linux kernel, as of version 5.1, provides following set of syscalls, > > + which accept data based on struct timespec and timeval with 64 bit > > + tv_sec: > > Do any of these actually use timeval? I thought the idea was that the new > syscalls for 64-bit time would all use timespec, with it being the > responsibility of libc to handle conversions to and from timeval as needed > (e.g. for gettimeofday with _TIME_BITS=64). clock_adjtime uses __kernel_timex_timeval, as is explained in https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAK8P3a0OBBEwU044jbe-YK2CmCnpNpUSiCA9uRo-8EwtcUva6g@mail.gmail.com/