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;
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 4/6] psci: Add hvc call service for ptp_kvm.
To:     "Jianyong Wu (Arm Technology China)" <Jianyong.Wu@arm.com>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "yangbo.lu@nxp.com" <yangbo.lu@nxp.com>,
        "john.stultz@linaro.org" <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "sean.j.christopherson@intel.com" <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        "maz@kernel.org" <maz@kernel.org>,
        "richardcochran@gmail.com" <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
        Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
        Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Steve Capper <Steve.Capper@arm.com>,
        "Kaly Xin (Arm Technology China)" <Kaly.Xin@arm.com>,
        "Justin He (Arm Technology China)" <Justin.He@arm.com>,
        nd <nd@arm.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
References: <20190918080716.64242-1-jianyong.wu@arm.com>
 <20190918080716.64242-5-jianyong.wu@arm.com>
 <83ed7fac-277f-a31e-af37-8ec134f39d26@redhat.com>
 <HE1PR0801MB1676F57B317AE85E3B934B32F48E0@HE1PR0801MB1676.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
 <629538ea-13fb-e666-8df6-8ad23f114755@redhat.com>
 <HE1PR0801MB167639E2F025998058A77F86F4890@HE1PR0801MB1676.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
 <ef6ab8bd-41ad-88f8-9cfd-dc749ca65310@redhat.com>
 <HE1PR0801MB1676A9D4A58118144F5C7B54F4850@HE1PR0801MB1676.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <06264d8a-b9c0-5f19-db2c-6190976a2a05@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Sep 2019 16:20:14 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR0801MB1676A9D4A58118144F5C7B54F4850@HE1PR0801MB1676.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 23/09/19 06:57, Jianyong Wu (Arm Technology China) wrote:
>> On 19/09/19 11:46, Jianyong Wu (Arm Technology China) wrote:
>>>> On 18/09/19 11:57, Jianyong Wu (Arm Technology China) wrote:
>>>>> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>>>> This is not Y2038-safe.  Please use ktime_get_real_ts64 instead,
>>>>>> and split the 64-bit seconds value between val[0] and val[1].
>>>
>>> Val[] should be long not u32 I think, so in arm64 I can avoid that
>>> Y2038_safe, but also need rewrite for arm32.
>>
>> I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with u32 val[], and as y=
ou
>> notice it lets you reuse code between arm and arm64.  It's up to you and
>> Marc to decide.
>>
> To compatible 32-bit, Integrates second value and nanosecond value as a n=
anosecond value then split it into val[0] and val[1] and split cycle value =
into val[2] and val[3],
>  In this way, time will overflow at Y2262.
> WDYT?

So if I understand correctly you'd multiply by 10^9 (or better shift by
30) the nanoseconds.

That works, but why not provide 5 output registers?  Alternatively, take
an address as input and write there.

Finally, on x86 we added an argument for the CLOCK_* that is being read
(currently only CLOCK_REALTIME, but having room for extensibility in the
API is always nice).

Paolo