Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754711AbaKDQMm (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2014 11:12:42 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.130]:50761 "EHLO mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932123AbaKDQMB (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2014 11:12:01 -0500 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Richard Cochran , John Stultz , Andy Lutomirski , Pawel Moll , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Paul Mackerras , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Masami Hiramatsu , Christopher Covington , Namhyung Kim , David Ahern , Tomeu Vizoso , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Linux API , Pawel Moll Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] perf: User/kernel time correlation and event generation Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 17:11:47 +0100 Message-ID: <2022010.zd45j2gEWl@wuerfel> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.16.0-10-generic; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1415060918-19954-1-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> <20141104082728.GB4253@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:Cnel/rO4INuWapA6WSh31QtAO1itNk392LfXkxFRQkJ TI2hERZeHLjf7c7H5pXnUWUND5uj6YFKMKLutrSd4EkMSIgy6K Jtf/X+5yhPmOH2GGoF5kwOva4xLEI305DjPEdHSHJMgD13NXA9 XYXcmbDbYn4LvhDRClo3Jn1ZS6QZkVHe0ALI0OBBRtz7Iv3JX7 mcJTQVMbkU9/s5DmgKc1Pu7bM9+7b5w3aBjSWtmLN/iV497/m+ YMAcRdrza7FK8fXB6+bt4Csa+0CeilWEvHkk6h+zQ98FfHI5qd oR6utd0RUsDNOrc/G2nE/Jf0VEizN8ZFYgEgamD+CYjOW+LUqn NIUWePKUX7OtLtdQxmNE= X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 04 November 2014 11:49:04 Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Richard Cochran wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 09:01:31AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Monday 03 November 2014 17:11:53 John Stultz wrote: > > > > I've got some thoughts on what a possible interface that wouldn't be > > > > awful could look like, but I'm still hesitant because I don't really > > > > know if exposing this sort of data is actually a good idea long term. > > > > > > I was also thinking (while working on an unrelated patch) we could use > > > a system call like > > > > > > int clock_getoffset(clockid_t clkid, struct timespec *offs); > > We might make *offs a timespec64 or u64 I don't think we are ready yet to introduce timespec64 in the uapi headers, this needs some more careful planning. Otherwise I agree it's bad to introduce syscalls that we already know will become obsolete soon. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/