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=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,T_DKIM_INVALID 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 D7BE9C43141 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 16:01:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88B6E21104 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 16:01:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="WsHZ0FMx" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 88B6E21104 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arndb.de 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 S933388AbeFUQB3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2018 12:01:29 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-f67.google.com ([209.85.215.67]:35507 "EHLO mail-lf0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933253AbeFUQB1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2018 12:01:27 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-f67.google.com with SMTP id i15-v6so5100347lfc.2; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:01:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=4k+TkGgYvKQsnv+ATqUw/aqsCSYKNSWpFfcCFRZIMsM=; b=WsHZ0FMxWcFeblW/c3fbydRLNzoMeAB9ib56bso6te/UfrE+ijXJ5l7f2d1UCk7JXF by1k808amSzg3PqtM8S0apJrXzGVLYWf8m2LC6ZUgtcHyr/oH2Lidw2RRwnBz3il8YZk Sfur6/jsV+9b4KL1AG8H5zZvj827xo3d3REyyiGrw2QEHbIydL9vj4U87AEfbkjw60xV VRUAd0RbBulkcuDAibEtKQdjsIAu6fRuBU3D4GwBZUpaYGfSSjL+idPBpqkvPhOdrcOU Besg7ZQJPajPVSm28R+JsCTAafs5fQMq5t2x55swEc/4IRndyzDznkorFCTJJ+/hOKrg xcQg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4k+TkGgYvKQsnv+ATqUw/aqsCSYKNSWpFfcCFRZIMsM=; b=A/VpwvGEVBeX2KRLQ/nD6ux/DM1nbJDk0c3s3pt7NzE+6CTwyOMU8Q4hsMb6CqXzDi HX8FbMP6v5f2qdLLM7m1SFhrskEz9ijmY5azIW6CtZz9ZM4QOqC93iHDlk0oNXoh/lXu Xhyxy6Sr413zpr+Sh05aCjqqeAKBvKEQC/xCthVyHTZSBA52mluY52XvyaZHTTXkS06F 6O9FUC3KTBZ+kSAfeMnnsLlLVFzuKewM1LBNy9hYA2OLa7mF9HcrO06w1fR9Dwl+dP0w 881ihHvMWO/Dr+v/5K3xN8ReEQzsnqrhRtXsjGWa6PQV7Hp77v9l4J0HJpU0SBVVO8CD xr2A== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1uEZVNqAsuEOVYJW1dAa3SU+5dv56ZK/Pl2VqCx3SPEe5rwVEl k0r6WzgUic1gP4WdFfjFgLPf62nUaxlfGmc7r0I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIHFqN24HMueQxMKOcmbLEn3nal4NQSygTkc1vPP+sfvSQTSz/ImQf1hZIziPZie6t+xVpkFHaScgo8P5EbH88= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:40d9:: with SMTP id r86-v6mr17367950lje.19.1529596885012; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:01:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:56c8:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:01:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180621154915.GA31947@gmail.com> References: <20180420120605.1612248-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20180420120605.1612248-2-arnd@arndb.de> <20180621154915.GA31947@gmail.com> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 18:01:24 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: x2XQWTyLUSnmAGsh2beKP9iDD7E Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] rusage: allow 64-bit times ru_utime/ru_stime To: Ingo Molnar Cc: y2038 Mailman List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "the arch/x86 maintainers" , Linux API , linux-arch , Paul Eggert , "Eric W . Biederman" , Richard Henderson , Ivan Kokshaysky , Matt Turner , Al Viro , Dominik Brodowski , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, Deepa Dinamani 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 On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:49 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> +int put_compat_rusage_time64(const struct __kernel_rusage *r, >> + struct compat_rusage_time64 __user *ru) >> +{ >> + struct compat_rusage_time64 r32; >> + memset(&r32, 0, sizeof(r32)); >> + r32.ru_utime.tv_sec = r->ru_utime.tv_sec; >> + r32.ru_utime.tv_usec = r->ru_utime.tv_usec; >> + r32.ru_stime.tv_sec = r->ru_stime.tv_sec; >> + r32.ru_stime.tv_usec = r->ru_stime.tv_usec; >> + r32.ru_maxrss = r->ru_maxrss; >> + r32.ru_ixrss = r->ru_ixrss; >> + r32.ru_idrss = r->ru_idrss; >> + r32.ru_isrss = r->ru_isrss; >> + r32.ru_minflt = r->ru_minflt; >> + r32.ru_majflt = r->ru_majflt; >> + r32.ru_nswap = r->ru_nswap; >> + r32.ru_inblock = r->ru_inblock; >> + r32.ru_oublock = r->ru_oublock; >> + r32.ru_msgsnd = r->ru_msgsnd; >> + r32.ru_msgrcv = r->ru_msgrcv; >> + r32.ru_nsignals = r->ru_nsignals; >> + r32.ru_nvcsw = r->ru_nvcsw; >> + r32.ru_nivcsw = r->ru_nivcsw; > > Could you please vertically align the right side of the initialization as well? > Much easier to check at a glance. ... > Which tabulated form made me notice the info.cause / si_code asymmetry - and a > brief check of the source shows that it's correct. No way would I have noticed it > in the jumbled up form above, so I think aligning such mass-initializations makes > sense. Sure, no problem. Do you have an opinion on the question I raised in the first patch [1], i.e. whether we actually want this to be done this way in the kernel, or one of the other approaches I described there? Thanks for taking a look here already! Arnd [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10352507/