Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-141657-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>, LKML
 <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>, John Stultz
 <jstultz@google.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar
 <mingo@kernel.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, Eric Biederman
 <ebiederm@xmission.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V2 11/50] posix-cpu-timers: Handle SIGEV_NONE timers
 correctly in timer_set()
In-Reply-To: <8734rrvr1p.fsf@somnus>
References: <20240410164558.316665885@linutronix.de>
 <20240410165551.635345704@linutronix.de> <8734rrvr1p.fsf@somnus>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 00:02:28 +0200
Message-ID: <87zftzzhfv.ffs@tglx>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Thu, Apr 11 2024 at 17:48, Anna-Maria Behnsen wrote:

> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> writes:
>
>> Expired SIGEV_NONE oneshot timers must return 0 nsec for the expiry time in
>> timer_get(), but the posix CPU timer implementation returns 1 nsec.
>
> copy paste error (get/set) ?

Yes.

>> Add the missing conditional.
>>
>> This will be cleaned up in a follow up patch.
>
> I'm confused. Why do you want to cleanup the conditional in a follow up
> patch?

This patch is to fix the issue. The next one consolidates the code, but
I can see why the "this will be ..." part of the changelog does not make
sense.

Thanks,

        tglx