Messages in this thread | | | From | Frederic Weisbecker <> | Date | Wed, 4 Jan 2017 14:47:08 +0100 | Subject | Re: [tip:timers/urgent] ktime: Get rid of the union |
| |
2017-01-04 10:39 GMT+01:00 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 09:54:12AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> On Tue, 3 Jan 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >> > > Get rid of the union and just keep ktime_t as simple typedef of type s64. >> > >> > All good stuff. One question that remains is why keep the type while >> > removing the cycles_t type? >> >> That would have been a massive surgery which I was not able to pull off on >> top of the other changes. > > And the reason ktime needs be s64 is because 0 is at boot, and we need > to represent time before boot, right? Might want to stick that in a > comment somewhere near that typedef, so I don't keep asking this ;-)
Aaah, that confused me as well :-)
| |