Hi Peter, Ahemd,
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 05:58:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[...]
> > > diff --git a/kernel/time/sched_clock.c b/kernel/time/sched_clock.c
> > > index fa3f800d7d76..ea007928d681 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/time/sched_clock.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/time/sched_clock.c
> > > @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ unsigned long long notrace sched_clock(void)
> > > struct clock_read_data *rd;
> > >
> > > do {
> > > - seq = raw_read_seqcount(&cd.seq);
> > > + seq = raw_read_seqcount_latch(&cd.seq);
> >
> > Understand this is doing the same thing with __ktime_get_fast_ns() and
> > I saw Peter acked to make change for this.
> >
> > Just want to confirm, since this patch introduces conflict with the
> > patch set "arm64: perf: Proper cap_user_time* support" [1], I should
> > rebase the patch set on top of this patch, right?
>
> Or rebase this patch on top of yours and include it, either way.
Have rebased this patch and included it in the patch set v3 for
"arm64: perf: Proper cap_user_time* support" [1].
Thanks!
Leo
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20200716051130.4359-3-leo....@linaro.org/T/#u
