linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL v2] timestamp fixes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHk-=whQLoKLw+MLRpRE6nW9KH48CdV=oR+uYENfEoeSf21XRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 23 Sep 2023 16:31:35 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL v2] timestamp fixes

On Sat, 23 Sept 2023 at 15:08, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
>
> I might be screweing my math, but I believe 24 bits should be enough
> to code 10,000,000 units of 100ns (it's enough for 16,777,216), which
> should be sufficient.  What am I missing?

You're missing me just being stupid, having a brain-fart, and doing
the math for 10ns despite telling everybody that 100ns should be the
reasonable thing.

Duh.

             Linus