On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 11:38 AM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.ker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 4:00 AM Deepa Dinamani <deepa.ker...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > The new type is meant to be used as a y2038 safe structure
> > to be used as part of cmsg data.
> > Presently the SO_TIMESTAMP socket option uses struct timeval
> > for timestamps. This is not y2038 safe.
> > Subsequent patches in the series add new y2038 safe socket
> > option to be used in the place of SO_TIMESTAMP_OLD.
> > struct sock_timeval will be used as the timestamp format
> > at that time.
> >
> > struct sock_timeval also maintains the same layout across
> > 32 bit and 64 bit ABIs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.ker...@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > include/uapi/linux/time.h | 5 +++++
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/time.h b/include/uapi/linux/time.h
> > index 04d5587f30d3..106f9398c285 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/time.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/time.h
> > @@ -70,6 +70,11 @@ struct __kernel_old_timeval {
> > };
> > #endif
> >
> > +struct sock_timeval {
> > + long long tv_sec;
> > + long long tv_usec;
>
> should these use fixed-width type __u64?
We have avoided using __u64/__s64 types for time types in uapi.
I think we did this for portability reasons.
Although this new type might not be required to be interpreted in
libc, I would prefer for this to be long long.
If there is a strong preference then I can change it.
-Deepa
