On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 05:54:41PM +0900, Jungseung Lee wrote: > posix_clock_compat_ioctl() is identical to posix_clock_ioctl(). > We don't need additional compat_ioctl in this time. > Remove posix_clock_compat_ioctl() and let posix_clock_ioctl() is in charge.
Did you test this patch? Did you run a 32 program using the ioctl on a 64 bit kernel? Thanks, Richard
