From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A6C87F66 for ; Fri, 30 May 2014 19:44:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 811278F8065 for ; Fri, 30 May 2014 17:44:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.zytor.com (terminus.zytor.com [198.137.202.10]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id QFMZ9u1JJ9DEZNeo (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 30 May 2014 17:44:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5389252A.5050503@zytor.com> Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 17:41:14 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC 11/32] xfs: convert to struct inode_time References: <1401480116-1973111-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <1401480116-1973111-12-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <20140531003712.GH14410@dastard> In-Reply-To: <20140531003712.GH14410@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner , Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, hch@infradead.org, john.stultz@linaro.org, lftan@altera.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, tglx@linutronix.de, joseph@codesourcery.com On 05/30/2014 05:37 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > > IOWs, the filesystem has to be able to reject any attempt to set a > timestamp that is can't represent on disk otherwise Bad Stuff will > happen, Actually it is questionable if it is worse to reject a timestamp or just let it wrap. Rejecting a valid timestamp is a bit like "You don't exist, go away." > and filesystems have to be able to specify in their on > disk format what timestamp encoding is being used. The solution will > be different for every filesystem that needs to support time beyond > 2038. Actually the cutoff can be really different for each filesystem, not necessarily 2038. However, I maintain the above still holds. Consider a filesystem that kept timestamps in YYMMDDHHMMSS format. What would you have expected such a filesystem to do on Jan 1, 2000? -hpa _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs