From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:56386)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1RkfcF-0007m3-Ta
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:36:17 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1RkfcB-0003Xq-RG
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:36:07 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9128)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1RkfcB-0003XE-I7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:36:03 -0500
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 14:51:07 -0200
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20120110165107.GA2730@amt.cnet>
References: <A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E018CCB@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
	<CAFEAcA8BgTkYh3h_hn_RgkKswMmFsWiL+FnoH=hNkHJcHb6wkw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA8BgTkYh3h_hn_RgkKswMmFsWiL+FnoH=hNkHJcHb6wkw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3]use int64 when compare two time
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: "aliguori@us.ibm.com" <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, "Shan,
	Haitao" <haitao.shan@intel.com>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, "avi@redhat.com" <avi@redhat.com>, "Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>

On Fri, Jan 06, 2012 at 01:20:55PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 6 January 2012 07:37, Zhang, Yang Z <yang.z.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
> > use int64 when compare two time
> >
> > int32 only represent only 136 years when comparing two times based on second. It would be better to use int64.
> 
> "int32", "int32_t" and "'int' which happens to be 32 bit" are all
> different types;
> your changelog message is confusing them.
> 
> Anyway, maybe we should be using time_t here? The functions use that
> internally anyway so is there a reason not to just use it in the API too?

time_t contains seconds since Epoch, which is not the case with
offsets in qemu_get_timedate/qemu_timedate_diff.