Re: [patch 14/55] timekeeping: Provide internal ktime_t based data

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 09:12:52AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Looking into it I think for now it's the least risky approach to keep
> the core logic based on the timespec stuff unmodified and update the
> ktime_t members in timekeeping_update(). Converting the whole thing to
> a pure nsec based mechanism and update the timespec stuff in
> timekeeping_update() needs a lot more thought and we should do that
> later on. It wont change any of the interfaces.

So I don't think you can only do nsec, seeing how the conversion from
nsec to timespec is expensive. So if we want to also avoid the timespec
-> nsec conversion we need to keep both, no two ways around it.

That said the timespec -> nsec conversion is heaps cheaper, although
still not what you call really sheep ;-)

Attachment: pgpEeOA4oPrvF.pgp
Description: PGP signature