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:   Fri, 27 Apr 2018 21:32:05 +0200
From:   Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] KVM: x86: use timespec64 for
 KVM_HC_CLOCK_PAIRING
Message-ID: <20180427193204.GD23874@flask>
References: <20180423080512.1614520-1-arnd@arndb.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180423080512.1614520-1-arnd@arndb.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

2018-04-23 10:04+0200, Arnd Bergmann:
> The hypercall was added using a struct timespec based implementation,
> but we should not use timespec in new code.
> 
> This changes it to timespec64. There is no functional change
> here since the implementation is only used in 64-bit kernels
> that use the same definition for timespec and timespec64.
> 
> Fixes: 55dd00a73a51 ("KVM: x86: add KVM_HC_CLOCK_PAIRING hypercall")

(Removed the "Fixes:" tag as it doesn't really change behavior.)

> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
> I originally sent this in October, but got no reply. The patch
> is still required for the overall cleanup of 'timespec' uses
> in the kernel, please apply.

Queued now, thanks!

Anything we need to do for the x86_platform_ops switch?