[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <147897712.8Iuj6e9dPp@wuerfel>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2016 21:28:37 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
y2038 Mailman List <y2038@...ts.linaro.org>,
linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] vfs: Add timestamp range check support
On Sunday, November 6, 2016 9:44:33 AM CET Deepa Dinamani wrote:
> I will post xfs tests that validate mount and range checking.
> I will keep the policy same as what the RFC suggests for now.
>
> Clamping can be verified once vfs is transitioned to using time64_t.
Won't it already work as expected on 64-bit architectures as they
have a 64-bit time_t?
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists