From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>
Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, arnd@arndb.de, john.stultz@linaro.org,
peterz@infradead.org, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
linux390@de.ibm.com, rth@twiddle.net, riel@redhat.com,
cl@linux.com, tj@kernel.org, fweisbec@gmail.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
y2038@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] cputime: Introduce cputime_to_timespec64()/timespec64_to_cputime()
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 12:31:23 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1507151226210.18576@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a1bd8d71caeb4051d0be87aad1baae7ababa4df7.1436511577.git.baolin.wang@linaro.org>
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015, Baolin Wang wrote:
> The cputime_to_timespec() and timespec_to_cputime() functions are
> not year 2038 safe on 32bit systems due to that the struct timepsec
> will overflow in 2038 year.
And how is this relevant? cputime is not based on wall clock time at
all. So what has 2038 to do with cputime?
We want proper explanations WHY we need such a change.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-15 10:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-15 5:47 [PATCH 0/6] Introduce 64bit accessors and structures required to address y2038 issues in the posix_clock subsystem Baolin Wang
2015-07-15 6:07 ` [PATCH 6/6] cputime: Introduce cputime_to_timespec64()/timespec64_to_cputime() Baolin Wang
2015-07-15 10:31 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2015-07-15 11:42 ` Baolin Wang
2015-07-15 11:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-07-16 2:22 ` Baolin Wang
2015-07-16 10:43 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-07-17 8:39 ` Baolin Wang
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=alpine.DEB.2.11.1507151226210.18576@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=baolin.wang@linaro.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux390@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tj@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