[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1397886.AAh13B9r2H@wuerfel>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 21:18:37 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Richard Kuo <rkuo@...eaurora.org>,
Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>,
Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>,
Tobias Klauser <tklauser@...tanz.ch>
Subject: Re: RFD: x32 ABI system call numbers
On Wednesday 31 August 2011 09:48:35 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> >
> > Well, we could chicken out and just use unsigned int for time_t on new
> > 32 bit ABIs, which would buy us time until ~2106 before we need to
> > convert everything to 64 bit...
>
> You do realize that there are probably quite a lot of programs that
> depend on signed time_t because they really do care about dates before
> 1970?
Yes, it already occurred to me after I had written the above that we
really want it to be signed, especially to allow a meaningful conversion
at least one-way between 32 and 64 bit time_t values.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists