On Saturday 31 May 2014 18:30:49 Vyacheslav Dubeyko wrote:
> By the way, what about NILFS2? Is NILFS2 ready for suggested approach
> without any changes?
nilfs2 and a lot of other file systems don't need any changes for
this, because they don't assign the inode time stamp fields to
a 'struct timespec'.
FWIW, nilfs2 uses a 64-bit seconds value, which is always safe and
can represent the full range of user space timespec on all machines.
Arnd
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: f2fs support, Lukáš Czerner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: f2fs support, Lukáš Czerner |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC 00/32] making inode time stamps y2038 ready, Arnd Bergmann |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH] xfstests: f2fs support, jaegeuk |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |