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=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham 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 0A9D9C43441 for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:58:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1F1721780 for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:58:52 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D1F1721780 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux-m68k.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1733227AbeKOBCZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Nov 2018 20:02:25 -0500 Received: from mail-vs1-f67.google.com ([209.85.217.67]:42721 "EHLO mail-vs1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727846AbeKOBCY (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Nov 2018 20:02:24 -0500 Received: by mail-vs1-f67.google.com with SMTP id b74so9652277vsd.9 for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 06:58:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qCGzNDuQH9vSRu+Fiidmh2F4/OGW5BLx2MAn5DAD5Pg=; b=uIqIQC7JdenyRsg/V+dgSpz0xnv9pk1NMr9hqBcQWpUiQ5Pia1dd+bSWBQjyEzQGpG YU56mlFLlxVhu/R/tQ5U1oUamq0Na++9aMObbAl/93d1B7TZbmadELXtLzjN+ZYCDvg6 BfyT07L+fPWoY8gA0hb/1zWNz5EMYL5teczbenK0FMmGN7rAAQHP9BSelG1mkafMX7yc AOQRvGjvI99mOVWW+HpYMLsIVWF0rpiUoeHyren2227IRsYOTyGgIsFsBbF/wFvu0aOD FtvZzUHzMd9xHoq+4CiCx7xxtUKL44VaEnci4E32PlE8N5GDVpXXaAymAz8pGSG2VjAo sHtQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gLTczn3Tl31+KAesVNsrkBl3UlmHPFmPYNRpeooENEm1QtvWOZC H6wj7vqmaibP/irtUjrmmu0ZBPFYvHA+X+4Ig5c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5fQ+qIVJHQ/eWlZVgJU/3A3xdDBJ6H8Fv0wcxfP1lfxzAjradN0gbzWQlhXittm26jAgicQAcaVlxdLryvJH58= X-Received: by 2002:a67:b404:: with SMTP id x4mr1012296vsl.152.1542207529222; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 06:58:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181112083422.GA19695@infradead.org> <20181113092012.GI30658@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> <20181113234336.GP30658@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> <20181114141632.GT30658@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20181114141632.GT30658@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> From: Geert Uytterhoeven Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 15:58:36 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/13] arm: Fix mutual exclusion in arch_gettimeoffset To: Russell King Cc: Finn Thain , Christoph Hellwig , Arnd Bergmann , Stephen N Chivers , Thomas Gleixner , Daniel Lezcano , John Stultz , linux-m68k , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux ARM , Theodore Tso Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Russell, On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 3:16 PM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 02:17:09PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote: > > So, even assuming that you're right about the limitations of single-timer > > platforms in general, removal of arch_gettimeoffset wouldn't require the > > removal of any platforms, AFAICT. > > I haven't proposed removing platforms. > > I'm just objecting to the idea of removing arch_gettimeoffset(), > thereby causing a regression by changing the resolution of > gettimeofday() without any sign of equivalent functionality. > > However, I now see (having searched mailing lists) what you are > trying to do - you have _not_ copied me or the mailing lists I'm > on with your cover message, so I'm *totally* lacking in the context > of your patch series, particularly where you are converting m68k > to use clocksources without needing the gettimeoffset() stuff. > > You have failed to explain that in this thread - probably assuming > that I've read your cover message. I haven't until now, because > you never sent it to me or the linux-arm-kernel mailing list. > > I have found this thread _very_ frustrating, and frankly a waste of > my time discussing the finer points because of this lack of context. > Please ensure that if you're going to be sending a patch series, > that the cover message at least finds its way to the intended > audience of your patches, so that everyone has the context they > need when looking at (eg) the single patch they may receive. > > Alternatively, if someone raises a problem with the patch, and you > _know_ you haven't done that, then please consider informing them > where they can get more context, eg, by providing a link to your > archived cover message. It would help avoid misunderstandings. Sorry for the lack of context. The real trigger was also not explained in the cover message, and was a the threat to remove platforms not using modern timekeeping APIs, cfr. "Removing support for old hardware from the kernel" (https://lwn.net/Articles/769468/). Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds