Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 1 Mar 2018 20:10:49 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@android.com>,
        Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
        Kevin Easton <kevin@guarana.org>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT patch 0/7] timekeeping: Unify clock MONOTONIC and clock
 BOOTTIME
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1803011936200.1391@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1803012009550.1391@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
References: <20180301163331.987775783@linutronix.de> <CA+55aFzV8Q20vL83xa+1UKzeQ0w-SAksCDxJD4szALRDCSUZ2w@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1803011936200.1391@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 1 Mar 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2018, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 8:33 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > This really needs lot of testing, documentation updates and more input from
> > > userspace folks to make a final decision.
> > 
> > Honestly, I don't think we'd get the testing this kind of change needs
> > except by just trying it.
> > 
> > I'm willing to merge this in the 4.17 merge window, with the
> > understanding that if people end up reporting issues, we may just have
> > to revert it all, and chalk it up to a learning experience - and add
> > the appropriate commentary in the kernel code about exactly what it
> > was that depended on that MONO/BOOT difference.
> 
> Fair enough. So we maybe just merge the first two patches and merge the
> cleanups and consolidation patches when we feel good enough.
> 
> I surely can queue the whole lot in next, but from PTI the experience I
> know how good the test coverage is. 4.14.stable would be the ideal testing
> ground. /me runs fast and hides

That said, at least the people who are asking for that should provide
testing results _before_ this gets applied or merged upstream.

Thanks,

	tglx