MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1513294025.18523.289.camel@codethink.co.uk>
References: <20171127193037.8711-1-deepa.kernel@gmail.com> <20171127193037.8711-4-deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
 <1513294025.18523.289.camel@codethink.co.uk>
From: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 08:28:53 -0800
Message-ID: <CABeXuvq_A4hwACBu=0WM6qeVtMbgb5qXpT_iL16u3qtdz_froA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Y2038] [PATCH v2 03/10] compat: enable compat_get/put_timespec64 always
To: Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
        y2038 Mailman List <y2038@lists.linaro.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Ben Hutchings
<ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-11-27 at 11:30 -0800, Deepa Dinamani wrote:
>> These functions are used in the repurposed compat syscalls
>> to provide backward compatibility for using 32 bit time_t
>> on 32 bit systems.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
> [...]
>
> If I'm not mistaken, these functions will be needed only if
> CONFIG_COMPAT_32BIT_TIME is enabled.  Should this be combined with
> patch #5?

This was purposely decided to be included unconditionally as the only
argument against making them conditional is code size. But, these
being very small functions it shouldn't matter all that much.
I had left this open for discussion. Since I did not hear any
preferences, I will make these conditional as Arnd and I discussed.

No, this should not be combined with patch 5. The purpose of that
patch is not to include all the code that is conditional upon that
config.

-Deepa