From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert@CS.UCLA.EDU>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bug-coreutils@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6 nanosecond time stamp weirdness breaks GCC build
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 17:23:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040402162338.GB32483@mail.shareable.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wu4yohtp.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu>
Paul Eggert wrote:
> > AFAIK there is no way to determine the stored resolution using file
> > operations alone.
>
> Would it be easy to add one? For example, we might extend pathconf so
> that pathconf(filename, _PC_MTIME_DELTA) returns the file system's
> mtime stamp resolution in nanoseconds.
pathconf() and fpathconf() are the obvious POSIXy interfaces for it.
Other possibilities are getxattr(), lgetxattr() and fgetxattr().
The only thing I don't like is that some cacheing algorithms will need
to make 2 system calls for each file being checked, instead of 1. I
see no way around that, though. At least the attribute approach would
allow all three (different) delta values to be read in one call (listxattr).
Is there a de facto standard interface used by another OS for this?
> I write "mtime" because I understand that some Microsoft file systems
> use different resolutions for mtime versus ctime versus atime, and
> mtime resolution is all that I need for now.
I didn't know that, thanks.
> Also, the NFSv3 protocol supports a delta quantity that tells the
> NFS client the mtime resolution on the NFS server, so if you assume
> NFSv3 or better the time stamp resolution is known for remote
> servers too.
Nice!
-- Jamie
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-02 16:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-01 19:28 Linux 2.6 nanosecond time stamp weirdness breaks GCC build Ulrich Weigand
2004-04-01 20:09 ` Andi Kleen
2004-04-01 20:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-04-01 20:46 ` Andi Kleen
2004-04-01 21:01 ` Ulrich Weigand
2004-04-01 21:44 ` Andi Kleen
2004-04-01 22:39 ` Joe Buck
2004-04-01 22:44 ` Paul Jarc
2004-04-01 22:48 ` Ulrich Weigand
2004-04-01 23:58 ` Joe Buck
2004-04-02 0:13 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-04-02 0:02 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-04-02 0:35 ` Paul Eggert
2004-04-02 1:14 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-04-02 7:57 ` James H. Cloos Jr.
2004-04-02 9:22 ` Paul Eggert
2004-04-02 16:23 ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2004-04-02 20:45 ` Paul Eggert
2004-04-02 21:07 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-04-02 21:56 ` Paul Eggert
2004-04-03 4:59 ` Andrew Pimlott
2004-04-02 0:37 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-07 16:03 ` Jörn Engel
2004-04-01 21:13 ` Janis Johnson
2004-04-01 21:41 ` Ulrich Weigand
2004-04-02 0:30 ` Alan Modra
2004-04-02 9:05 ` P
2004-04-02 17:27 ` Alexandre Oliva
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-04-01 20:51 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
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=20040402162338.GB32483@mail.shareable.org \
--to=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=bug-coreutils@gnu.org \
--cc=eggert@CS.UCLA.EDU \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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