On 22 September 2017 at 16:48, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:47 AM, Baolin Wang wrote:
>> On 21 September 2017 at 20:50, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Baolin Wang wrote:
The struct snd_pcm_sync_ptr will use 'timespec' type variables to record
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:47 AM, Baolin Wang wrote:
> On 21 September 2017 at 20:50, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Baolin Wang wrote:
>>> The struct snd_pcm_sync_ptr will use 'timespec' type variables to record
>>
>> This looks correct, but there is a subtlety here to
On 21 September 2017 at 20:50, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Baolin Wang wrote:
>> The struct snd_pcm_sync_ptr will use 'timespec' type variables to record
>> timestamp, which is not year 2038 safe on 32bits system.
>>
>> Thus we introduced 'struct snd_pcm_sync_ptr32' an
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Baolin Wang wrote:
> The struct snd_pcm_sync_ptr will use 'timespec' type variables to record
> timestamp, which is not year 2038 safe on 32bits system.
>
> Thus we introduced 'struct snd_pcm_sync_ptr32' and 'struct snd_pcm_sync_ptr64'
> to handle 32bit time_t and
The struct snd_pcm_sync_ptr will use 'timespec' type variables to record
timestamp, which is not year 2038 safe on 32bits system.
Thus we introduced 'struct snd_pcm_sync_ptr32' and 'struct snd_pcm_sync_ptr64'
to handle 32bit time_t and 64bit time_t in native mode, which replace
timespec with s64 t
5 matches
Mail list logo