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, 12 Jul 2018 01:26:09 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc:     tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de,
        y2038@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] time: Add struct __kernel_timex
Message-ID: <20180712082609.GB8802@infradead.org>
References: <20180707054247.19802-1-deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
 <20180707054247.19802-6-deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180707054247.19802-6-deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

I don't think this patches makes sense without the next one,
which actually uses the structure.

> +/* CONFIG_64BIT_TIME enables new 64 bit time_t syscalls in the compat path
> + * and 32-bit emulation.
> + */

Wrong comment style, also the 'compat path is the 32 (or 31 in case of
s390) bit emulation, so the comment seems rather confusing.

> +#ifndef CONFIG_64BIT_TIME
> +#define __kernel_timex timex
> +#endif

using #defines for structs has all kinds of ill effects.  Why can't
we aways use __kernel_timex for the in-kernel usage?

> +#ifndef __kernel_timex
> +struct __kernel_timex {
> +	unsigned int modes;	/* mode selector */
> +	int :32;            /* pad */

Why do we need padding for a purely in-kernel structure?

Also the anonymous member syntax is rather odd and I don't remeber
us using it anywhere else.  Why here?