From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753827AbXD0AL0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:11:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753897AbXD0AL0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:11:26 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([192.83.249.54]:43291 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753827AbXD0ALY (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:11:24 -0400 Message-ID: <46313F99.6080402@zytor.com> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:11:05 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070419) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: Ulrich Drepper , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] utimensat implementation References: <200704262249.l3QMn5C2021588@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20070426162530.bc30a1bb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070426162530.bc30a1bb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:49:05 -0400 Ulrich Drepper wrote: >> >> If the tv_nsec value of either of the elements of the utimes parameter to utimensat() is UTIME_OMIT no update of that respective value is performed. > > ITYM "If the value of either of the elements..." > > +#define UTIME_NOW ((1l << 30) - 1l) > +#define UTIME_OMIT ((1l << 30) - 2l) > > OK, so there's no collision on ts_nsec if unnormalised timespecs are > disallowed. > > But there's a potential collision on ts_sec? Do we know what date that > corresponds to? "If the tv_nsec value" implies that these magic numbers have no impact on these. I'm a bit leery of abusing the timespec value like this, though. A flags field seem like it would be cleaner. Something else... if we're dickering with these interfaces, shouldn't we allow setting atime as well? -hpa