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: [PATCH v5 3/6] timekeeping: Add clocksource to
 system_time_snapshot
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc:     Jianyong Wu <jianyong.wu@arm.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        yangbo.lu@nxp.com, john.stultz@linaro.org,
        sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, maz@kernel.org,
        richardcochran@gmail.com, Mark.Rutland@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
        suzuki.poulose@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, Steve.Capper@arm.com, Kaly.Xin@arm.com,
        justin.he@arm.com, nd@arm.com
References: <20191015104822.13890-1-jianyong.wu@arm.com>
 <20191015104822.13890-4-jianyong.wu@arm.com>
 <9274d21c-2c43-2e0d-f086-6aaba3863603@redhat.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1910152212580.2518@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Message-ID: <aa1ec910-b7b6-2568-4583-5fa47aac367f@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:36:42 +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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1910152212580.2518@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
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 15/10/19 22:13, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Oct 2019, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 15/10/19 12:48, Jianyong Wu wrote:
>>> =20
>>>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>=20
> You're sure about having reviewed that in detail?

I did review the patch; the void* ugliness is not in this one, and I do
have some other qualms on that one.

> This changelog is telling absolutely nothing WHY anything outside of the
> timekeeping core code needs access to the current clocksource. Neither do=
es
> it tell why it is safe to provide the pointer to random callers.

Agreed on the changelog, but the pointer to a clocksource is already
part of the timekeeping external API via struct system_counterval_t.
get_device_system_crosststamp for example expects a clocksource pointer
but provides no way to get such a pointer.

Paolo