* [PATCH] char: ipmi: ipmi_ssif: Replace timeval with timespec64
@ 2015-10-23 19:09 Amitoj Kaur Chawla
2015-10-23 19:23 ` [Y2038] " Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Amitoj Kaur Chawla @ 2015-10-23 19:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: outreachy-kernel; +Cc: y2038
This patch replaces timeval with timespec64 as 32 bit 'struct timeval'
will not give current time beyond 2038.
The patch changes the code to use ktime_get_real_ts64() which returns
a 'struct timespec64' instead of do_gettimeofday() which returns a
'struct timeval'
This patch also alters the format strings in pr_info() for now.tv_sec
and now.tv_nsec to incorporate 'long long' on 32 bit architectures and
leading zeroes respectively.
Signed-off-by: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@gmail.com>
---
drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c | 9 +++++----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c
index 877205d..926add4 100644
--- a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c
+++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c
@@ -52,6 +52,7 @@
#include <linux/kthread.h>
#include <linux/acpi.h>
#include <linux/ctype.h>
+#include <linux/time64.h>
#define PFX "ipmi_ssif: "
#define DEVICE_NAME "ipmi_ssif"
@@ -1041,12 +1042,12 @@ static void sender(void *send_info,
start_next_msg(ssif_info, flags);
if (ssif_info->ssif_debug & SSIF_DEBUG_TIMING) {
- struct timeval t;
+ struct timespec64 t;
- do_gettimeofday(&t);
- pr_info("**Enqueue %02x %02x: %ld.%6.6ld\n",
+ ktime_get_real_ts64(&t);
+ pr_info("**Enqueue %02x %02x: %lld.%6.06ld\n",
msg->data[0], msg->data[1],
- (long) t.tv_sec, (long) t.tv_usec);
+ (long long) t.tv_sec, (long) t.tv_nsec / NSEC_PER_USEC);
}
}
--
1.9.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Y2038] [PATCH] char: ipmi: ipmi_ssif: Replace timeval with timespec64
2015-10-23 19:09 [PATCH] char: ipmi: ipmi_ssif: Replace timeval with timespec64 Amitoj Kaur Chawla
@ 2015-10-23 19:23 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-10-23 19:28 ` Amitoj Kaur Chawla
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2015-10-23 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: y2038; +Cc: Amitoj Kaur Chawla, outreachy-kernel
On Saturday 24 October 2015 00:39:22 Amitoj Kaur Chawla wrote:
> This patch replaces timeval with timespec64 as 32 bit 'struct timeval'
> will not give current time beyond 2038.
>
> The patch changes the code to use ktime_get_real_ts64() which returns
> a 'struct timespec64' instead of do_gettimeofday() which returns a
> 'struct timeval'
>
> This patch also alters the format strings in pr_info() for now.tv_sec
> and now.tv_nsec to incorporate 'long long' on 32 bit architectures and
> leading zeroes respectively.
>
> Signed-off-by: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@gmail.com>
> ---
The patch looks correct, but I think that this time the format string
was actually ok already for the microsecond value. Just leave it at "%6.6ld"
and send it again with the maintainers on Cc.
> drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c | 9 +++++----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c
> index 877205d..926add4 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c
> @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@
> #include <linux/kthread.h>
> #include <linux/acpi.h>
> #include <linux/ctype.h>
> +#include <linux/time64.h>
>
> #define PFX "ipmi_ssif: "
> #define DEVICE_NAME "ipmi_ssif"
> @@ -1041,12 +1042,12 @@ static void sender(void *send_info,
> start_next_msg(ssif_info, flags);
>
> if (ssif_info->ssif_debug & SSIF_DEBUG_TIMING) {
> - struct timeval t;
> + struct timespec64 t;
>
> - do_gettimeofday(&t);
> - pr_info("**Enqueue %02x %02x: %ld.%6.6ld\n",
> + ktime_get_real_ts64(&t);
> + pr_info("**Enqueue %02x %02x: %lld.%6.06ld\n",
> msg->data[0], msg->data[1],
> - (long) t.tv_sec, (long) t.tv_usec);
> + (long long) t.tv_sec, (long) t.tv_nsec / NSEC_PER_USEC);
> }
> }
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Y2038] [PATCH] char: ipmi: ipmi_ssif: Replace timeval with timespec64
2015-10-23 19:23 ` [Y2038] " Arnd Bergmann
@ 2015-10-23 19:28 ` Amitoj Kaur Chawla
2015-10-23 19:34 ` [Outreachy kernel] " Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Amitoj Kaur Chawla @ 2015-10-23 19:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann; +Cc: y2038, outreachy-kernel
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Saturday 24 October 2015 00:39:22 Amitoj Kaur Chawla wrote:
>> This patch replaces timeval with timespec64 as 32 bit 'struct timeval'
>> will not give current time beyond 2038.
>>
>> The patch changes the code to use ktime_get_real_ts64() which returns
>> a 'struct timespec64' instead of do_gettimeofday() which returns a
>> 'struct timeval'
>>
>> This patch also alters the format strings in pr_info() for now.tv_sec
>> and now.tv_nsec to incorporate 'long long' on 32 bit architectures and
>> leading zeroes respectively.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@gmail.com>
>> ---
>
> The patch looks correct, but I think that this time the format string
> was actually ok already for the microsecond value. Just leave it at "%6.6ld"
> and send it again with the maintainers on Cc.
>
Oh okay can I ask the reason that the change was required there but not here?
--
Amitoj
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [Y2038] [PATCH] char: ipmi: ipmi_ssif: Replace timeval with timespec64
2015-10-23 19:28 ` Amitoj Kaur Chawla
@ 2015-10-23 19:34 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-10-23 19:42 ` Amitoj Kaur Chawla
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2015-10-23 19:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: outreachy-kernel; +Cc: Amitoj Kaur Chawla, y2038
On Saturday 24 October 2015 00:58:12 Amitoj Kaur Chawla wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > On Saturday 24 October 2015 00:39:22 Amitoj Kaur Chawla wrote:
> >> This patch replaces timeval with timespec64 as 32 bit 'struct timeval'
> >> will not give current time beyond 2038.
> >>
> >> The patch changes the code to use ktime_get_real_ts64() which returns
> >> a 'struct timespec64' instead of do_gettimeofday() which returns a
> >> 'struct timeval'
> >>
> >> This patch also alters the format strings in pr_info() for now.tv_sec
> >> and now.tv_nsec to incorporate 'long long' on 32 bit architectures and
> >> leading zeroes respectively.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >
> > The patch looks correct, but I think that this time the format string
> > was actually ok already for the microsecond value. Just leave it at "%6.6ld"
> > and send it again with the maintainers on Cc.
> >
>
> Oh okay can I ask the reason that the change was required there but not here?
>
>
The other one was "%lu", which has no leading zeroes, while this one
was "%6.6ld", which does.
I keep getting confused by printf format strings and sometimes have
to try these out myself, but my understanding is that these all
behave the same way:
"%06ld"
"%.6ld"
"%6.6ld"
"%6.06ld"
Arnd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [Y2038] [PATCH] char: ipmi: ipmi_ssif: Replace timeval with timespec64
2015-10-23 19:34 ` [Outreachy kernel] " Arnd Bergmann
@ 2015-10-23 19:42 ` Amitoj Kaur Chawla
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Amitoj Kaur Chawla @ 2015-10-23 19:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann; +Cc: outreachy-kernel, y2038
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 1:04 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Saturday 24 October 2015 00:58:12 Amitoj Kaur Chawla wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>> > On Saturday 24 October 2015 00:39:22 Amitoj Kaur Chawla wrote:
>> >> This patch replaces timeval with timespec64 as 32 bit 'struct timeval'
>> >> will not give current time beyond 2038.
>> >>
>> >> The patch changes the code to use ktime_get_real_ts64() which returns
>> >> a 'struct timespec64' instead of do_gettimeofday() which returns a
>> >> 'struct timeval'
>> >>
>> >> This patch also alters the format strings in pr_info() for now.tv_sec
>> >> and now.tv_nsec to incorporate 'long long' on 32 bit architectures and
>> >> leading zeroes respectively.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@gmail.com>
>> >> ---
>> >
>> > The patch looks correct, but I think that this time the format string
>> > was actually ok already for the microsecond value. Just leave it at "%6.6ld"
>> > and send it again with the maintainers on Cc.
>> >
>>
>> Oh okay can I ask the reason that the change was required there but not here?
>>
>>
>
> The other one was "%lu", which has no leading zeroes, while this one
> was "%6.6ld", which does.
>
> I keep getting confused by printf format strings and sometimes have
> to try these out myself, but my understanding is that these all
> behave the same way:
>
> "%06ld"
> "%.6ld"
> "%6.6ld"
> "%6.06ld"
>
> Arnd
Oh, yes in the previous change I had tried for "%lu" myself, with
several examples. This time I didn't, not paying attention to the
change. My bad.
--
Amitoj
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-10-23 19:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-10-23 19:09 [PATCH] char: ipmi: ipmi_ssif: Replace timeval with timespec64 Amitoj Kaur Chawla
2015-10-23 19:23 ` [Y2038] " Arnd Bergmann
2015-10-23 19:28 ` Amitoj Kaur Chawla
2015-10-23 19:34 ` [Outreachy kernel] " Arnd Bergmann
2015-10-23 19:42 ` Amitoj Kaur Chawla
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.