On Friday 20 March 2015, Richard Cochran wrote:
> Instead of changing to ktime_t, just use timespec64 instead. That
> way, each change will be a couple of lines per file.
This was the first idea, but it seems a bit silly when all the drivers
use a 64-bit nanosecond value just like ktime_t. While both of the
current users require a timespec at the moment, it's possible that
there would one day be a third user that actually can make sense of
a ktime_t, and then we'd avoid the expensive back-and-forth conversion.
For now, using ktime_t in the interface merely simplifies the drivers
by moving the conversion into the subsystem, but it is not any more
or less efficient than the previous method.
> > I do agree however that we should merge the entire series at once so
> > we end up with a reasonable state afterwards, and we only need the
> > conditional
> > in order to have a bisectable git history.
>
> It is still bisectable with one or two patches.
Of course, but it would be rather bad style.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
