From: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xs4all.nl>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: y2038@lists.linaro.org, Junghak Sung <jh1009.sung@samsung.com>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Y2038] Which type to use for timestamps: u64 or s64?
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 10:05:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <563B1BE8.8090007@xs4all.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10717379.s8aWAKUxAs@wuerfel>
On 11/05/15 09:36, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 05 November 2015 08:41:11 Hans Verkuil wrote:
>> Hi Arnd,
>>
>> We're redesigning the timestamp handling in the video4linux subsystem moving away
>> from struct timeval to a single timestamp in ns (what ktime_get_ns() gives us).
>> But I was wondering: ktime_get_ns() gives a s64, so should we use s64 as well as
>> the timestamp type we'll eventually be returning to the user, or should we use u64?
>>
>> The current patch series we made uses a u64, but I am now beginning to doubt that
>> decision.
>
> I would lean towards u64, but I don't think it really matters either way,
> especially since all the drivers should be using monotonic timestamps now.
One thing that might be easier if it is a s64 is when adding/subtracting offsets
from the timestamp. And the other reason is that a u64 gives a false view of the
underlying type. With a s64 it is clear that a timestamp will wrap around after
292 years instead of double that. Admittedly, not our problem, but if we ever send
a space probe to Alpha Centauri, then it might be nice to know as application
developer that you need to take special measures if the mission takes longer than
292 years :-)
Regards,
Hans
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-05 9:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-05 7:41 Which type to use for timestamps: u64 or s64? Hans Verkuil
2015-11-05 8:36 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-11-05 9:05 ` Hans Verkuil [this message]
2015-11-05 9:25 ` [Y2038] " Arnd Bergmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=563B1BE8.8090007@xs4all.nl \
--to=hverkuil@xs4all.nl \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=jh1009.sung@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=y2038@lists.linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox