[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdW5HSVyXpz9HFcrDDYq=zOFrBr6d8jOd8i_FMkXsEpr2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 22:35:08 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ley Foon Tan <lftan@...era.com>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
LeyFoon Tan <lftan.linux@...il.com>,
Chung-Lin Tang <cltang@...esourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/25] Change time_t and clock_t to 64 bit
Hi Arnd,
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> I think we have three categories:
Thanks for the list!
> a) interfaces that uses relative time_t/timespec/timeval:
> b) interfaces that don't make sense for times in the past:
> c) interfaces that require absolute times:
> - stat/lstat/fstatat/
> - utime/utimes/futimesat
>
> These absolutely have to use something better than time_t
> both in user space and in the kernel so we can deal with
> old files. A lot of file systems need to be fixed as well so
> we can actually store the times, regardless of whether we
> are running a 32 or 64 bit kernel.
So these are the ones we have to worry about.
It looks like they all involve I/O? Apart from the case of using block data
from the buffer cache, the 64-bit operations should disappear in the
actual I/O noise, right?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
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