[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: New nanosecond stat patch for 2.5.44
On Sunday 27 October 2002 19:23, Chris Friesen wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > We probably need to revamp struct stat anyway, to support a larger
> > dev_t, and possibly a larger ino_t (we should account for 64-bit ino_t
> > at least if we have to redesign the structure.) At that point I would
> > really like to advocate for int64_t ts_sec and uint32_t ts_nsec and
> > quite possibly a int32_t ts_taidelta to deal with leap seconds... I'd
> > personally like struct timespec to look like the above everywhere.
> For filesystems can we get away with just the 64-bit nanoseconds? By my
> calculations that gives something like 584 years--do we need to worry
> about files older than that?

1) The hard drive is only about 50 years old, so there aren't any files older
than that at the moment:

2) This thing is unlikely to be a problem in our lifetimes, our
grandchildren's lifetimes, or our great grandchildren's lifetimes (barring
unforseen advances in active telomere reconstruction and a regenerative
interpretation of DNA that somehow looks at it as a blueprint rather than a

3) If any current hardware or software is still in use in the year 2554, it
will be seriously overdue for an upgrade.


-- - Terry Pratchett, Eric Raymond, Pete Abrams, Illiad,
CmdrTaco, liquid nitrogen ice cream, and caffienated jello. Well why not?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:30    [W:0.063 / U:7.880 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site