xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC 00/32] making inode time stamps y2038 ready

To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/32] making inode time stamps y2038 ready
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 20:22:37 +0200
Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mtd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hpa@xxxxxxxxx, logfs@xxxxxxxxx, linux-afs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, joseph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-cifs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, codalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx, coda@xxxxxxxxxx, geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, fuse-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, reiserfs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx, tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ntfs-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, samba-technical@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-f2fs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ocfs2-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, lftan@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=ie7H2OsbBeJra4WsF5ZEIoba6tdvoSXEcZdv4TPiHkU=; b=HAyZvRXxujauZkJwQWKe+XJEla7yW9SZc5LsANGU5RqfjVLd+LdtroWQl/Atytvdc7 jyQjJ4gEF80JBR8bn5vGzX8uC4bVsiZZWNJaa4JC69OmrNYTvcEimqHppAjW7P43mGMj Khac1zDlADHj2QvEIv76yJ2nemDK7hk3UhVs0U+d4g9OrOHgDJI/tqgtxDa3/CMNrVxs Au1Hu0bitYh8q7/pqtIOjXzRi/ONmDQOp6nuSAP8RjJ+SMPPrgMy+K41fGMe5uqoiFTI XUiESwMgZ4wvVPj0irta8Ybc8gnCSl8I0K7+acQhYbd8JowNp3hFWieioIy17y8ioAP2 E5JA==
In-reply-to: <6347520.8jMPlVsFjM@wuerfel>
References: <1401480116-1973111-1-git-send-email-arnd@xxxxxxxx> <20140531145114.GA3721@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <6347520.8jMPlVsFjM@wuerfel>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 05:23:02PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> 
> It's an approximation:

(Approximately never ;)

> with 64-bit timestamps, you can represent close to 300 billion
> years, which is way past the time that our planet can sustain
> life of any form[1].

Did you mean mean 64 bits worth of seconds?

  2^64 / (3600*24*365) = 584,942,417,355

That is more than 300 billion years, and still, it is not quite the
same as "never".

In any case, that term is not too helpful in the comparison table,
IMHO. One could think that some sort of clever running count relative
to the last mount time was implied.

Thanks,
Richard

[1] You are forgetting the immortal robotic overlords.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>