[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: New nanosecond stat patch for 2.5.44
    Followup to:  <>
    By author: Andreas Dilger <>
    In newsgroup:
    > 3) The fields you are usurping in struct stat are actually there for the
    > Y2038 problem (when time_t wraps). At least that's what Ted said when
    > we were looking into nsec times for ext2/3. Granted, we may all be
    > using 64-bit systems by 2038... I've always thought 64 bits is much
    > to large for time_t, so we could always use 20 or 30 bits for sub-second
    > times, and the remaining bits for extending time_t at the high end,
    > and mask those off for now, but that is a separate issue...

    64-bit time_t is nice because you don't *ever* need to worry about
    overflow; it's capable of handling times on a galactic lifespan
    scale. It's overkill, of course, but it's the *right* kind of

    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.


    <> at work, <> in private!
    "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." <>
    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:0.021 / U:3.704 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site