From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09B08C3A5A1 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:40:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D420720856 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:40:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="L+91U0S2" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2405087AbfHVRkt (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:40:49 -0400 Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]:48297 "EHLO out3-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732134AbfHVRkp (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:40:45 -0400 Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41EAF2203C; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:40:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:40:44 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=8pZAXt RMx+VEVnKNoMyIg9vofEv03RCUzdqHEbFK3i0=; b=L+91U0S2PhF9g2vi4rzc2P PBexqJj7AJXB1KXWWokVHUTqufsRT2AD0HhEgN9iW2SrGLe5Lj01pIJKzvvuB/Gk xQIn3uW5Yh4OcK6qWlUrxP7I/7iz9xRL6WPpDrFeD5XB9pIE8I0LQ4N74zULhe1P Zg2p5y66v9p2c/NzyIYmfcOxylhdbQbyRjkXUmPe3aeVC42zN1Nvb/h/HE2kQuvH /gmLNfW60k9Q78aEGUItMPezmyTC6CIVLJr0Cdu5K7b+xkFenGsehH4ZMS45z+xy Fm6IhwHhkPXt2oG7SU2P2HDwZiqrrJCOCZu2sRdhUiqpvx2n+n+kjhx3Vg1a5BEQ == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrudegiedgjedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjfgesthdtredttdervdenucfhrhhomhepkfguohcu ufgthhhimhhmvghluceoihguohhstghhsehiughoshgthhdrohhrgheqnecukfhppedule efrdegjedrudeihedrvdehudenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepihguohhstghh sehiughoshgthhdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from localhost (unknown [193.47.165.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B76EA80059; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:40:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:40:37 +0300 From: Ido Schimmel To: Andrew Lunn , arnd@arndb.de Cc: Aya Levin , "David S. Miller" , Jiri Pirko , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [net] devlink: Add method for time-stamp on reporter's dump Message-ID: <20190822174037.GA18030@splinter> References: <1566461871-21992-1-git-send-email-ayal@mellanox.com> <20190822140635.GH13020@lunn.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190822140635.GH13020@lunn.ch> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 04:06:35PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:17:51AM +0300, Aya Levin wrote: > > When setting the dump's time-stamp, use ktime_get_real in addition to > > jiffies. This simplifies the user space implementation and bypasses > > some inconsistent behavior with translating jiffies to current time. > > Hi Aya > > Is this year 2038 safe? I don't know enough about this to answer the > question myself. Hi Andrew, Good point. 'struct timespec' is not considered year 2038 safe and unfortunately I recently made the mistake of using it to communicate timestamps to user space over netlink. :/ The code is still in net-next, so I will fix it while I can. Arnd, would it be acceptable to use 'struct __kernel_timespec' instead? Thanks