[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Finegrained a/c/mtime was Re: Directory notification problem
On 3 Oct 2001, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

> Ulrich Drepper <> writes:
> > Andi Kleen <> writes:
> >
> > > For stat is also requires a changed glibc ABI -- the glibc/2.4 stat64
> >
> > Not only stat64, also plain stat.
> >
> > > structure reserved an additional 4 bytes for every timestamp, but these
> > > either need to be used to give more seconds for the year 2038 problem
> > > or be used for the ms fractions. y2038 is somewhat important too.
> >
> > The fields are meant for nanoseconds. The y2038 will definitely be
> > solved by time-shifting or making time_t unsigned. In any way nothing
> > of importance here and now. Especially since there won't be many
> > systems which are running today and which have a 32-bit time_t be used
> > then. For the rest I'm sure that in 37 years there will be the one or
> > the other ABI change.
> Right. Given current uptimes and being optimistic the fix for y2038
> is probably needed by 2030 or just a little later. But in any case
> 64 bit systems should be maxing out by then, and the conversion to 128
> bit systems should have already happened on the server side. 32 bit
> systems will likely be limited to embedded and legacy systems by then.
> Eric

Why do I get the feeling no one has learned from the problems the computer
industry had with 2 digit date fields?

Odds are legacy systems will be running something people for whatever
reason couldn't replace.


Gerhard Mack

<>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.

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 13:03    [W:0.084 / U:4.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site