From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S965868AbeAJPtm (ORCPT <rfc822;ralf@linux-mips.org> + 1 other);
        Wed, 10 Jan 2018 10:49:42 -0500
Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:47757 "EHLO newverein.lst.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S965742AbeAJPtG (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 10 Jan 2018 10:49:06 -0500
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 16:49:04 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Avi Kivity <avi@scylladb.com>, linux-aio@kvack.org,
        Linux FS-devel Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        y2038 Mailman List <y2038@lists.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 31/31] aio: implement io_pgetevents
Message-ID: <20180110154904.GB18707@lst.de>
References: <20180104080043.14506-1-hch@lst.de> <20180104080043.14506-32-hch@lst.de> <CAK8P3a3xanoBFrs09T0aaaKwnNM-8RTfqPi_Hsue=FS-6XL1zg@mail.gmail.com> <20180110081157.GA9659@lst.de> <CAK8P3a1rp=HjsUBh-Hm1stSFd9JhJ1hgNq28YRnpamUDzuOQCw@mail.gmail.com> <20180110145948.GA17573@lst.de> <CAK8P3a0fUekF4qJOatZQ1-O2dSzvSFW962Yoqz6pbyG_Z+W7gg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a0fUekF4qJOatZQ1-O2dSzvSFW962Yoqz6pbyG_Z+W7gg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 04:48:05PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Ok, fair enough. Given that the old version gets obsoleted by this
> one, it shouldn't get much uglier than it already is here when you
> start out with a regular timespec. We just need to be aware of possible
> clashes when we get the patches merged at the same time.

I still hope to get this into 4.15.  If it gets delayed and we
have a coherent 64-bit time_t abi around already I can reconsider
the decision.