* Re: year 2038 problem on x86-64
[not found] ` <2HnjK-2Ha-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
@ 2004-09-22 22:27 ` Andi Kleen
2004-09-22 22:34 ` Pavel Machek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andi Kleen @ 2004-09-22 22:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: linux-kernel
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> writes:
>
> ... __ARCH_WANT_SYS_TIME actually is set on x86-64.
But it's not used. It declares an own sys_time64 in arch/x86_64
By default the vsyscall code is used.
Also sys_time is legacy, most users should be using gettimeofday()
-Andi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: year 2038 problem on x86-64
2004-09-22 22:27 ` year 2038 problem on x86-64 Andi Kleen
@ 2004-09-22 22:34 ` Pavel Machek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2004-09-22 22:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andi Kleen; +Cc: linux-kernel
Hi!
> >
> > ... __ARCH_WANT_SYS_TIME actually is set on x86-64.
>
> But it's not used. It declares an own sys_time64 in arch/x86_64
> By default the vsyscall code is used.
So should __ARCH_WANT_SYS_TIME be killed from x86_64?
--
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: year 2038 problem on x86-64
[not found] ` <2HnWp-3b7-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
@ 2004-09-22 22:51 ` Andi Kleen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andi Kleen @ 2004-09-22 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: linux-kernel
Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> writes:
> Hi!
>
>> >
>> > ... __ARCH_WANT_SYS_TIME actually is set on x86-64.
>>
>> But it's not used. It declares an own sys_time64 in arch/x86_64
>> By default the vsyscall code is used.
>
> So should __ARCH_WANT_SYS_TIME be killed from x86_64?
No. The 32bit emulation uses it.
In theory you could make it conditional on CONFIG_IA32_EMULATION,
but that would be probably overkill.
-Andi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: year 2038 problem on x86-64
2004-09-22 21:30 year 9223372034708485227 problem Pavel Machek
@ 2004-09-22 21:45 ` Pavel Machek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2004-09-22 21:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kernel list
Hi!
> For testing (read() and write() is returning wrong value on 2.4
> kernels) I played a bit with really big numbers... And I found out we
> have year 9223372034708485227 problem ;-).
And we have some nearer problems, too.
#ifdef __ARCH_WANT_SYS_TIME
/*
* sys_time() can be implemented in user-level using
* sys_gettimeofday(). Is this for backwards compatibility? If so,
* why not move it into the appropriate arch directory (for those
* architectures that need it).
*
* XXX This function is NOT 64-bit clean!
*/
asmlinkage long sys_time(int __user * tloc)
{
int i;
struct timeval tv;
do_gettimeofday(&tv);
i = tv.tv_sec;
if (tloc) {
if (put_user(i,tloc))
i = -EFAULT;
}
return i;
}
... __ARCH_WANT_SYS_TIME actually is set on x86-64.
Pavel
--
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-09-22 22:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <2Hn0k-2wz-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2HnjK-2Ha-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-09-22 22:27 ` year 2038 problem on x86-64 Andi Kleen
2004-09-22 22:34 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] <2HnMR-35F-55@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2HnMR-35F-57@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2HnMR-35F-53@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2HnWp-3b7-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-09-22 22:51 ` Andi Kleen
2004-09-22 21:30 year 9223372034708485227 problem Pavel Machek
2004-09-22 21:45 ` year 2038 problem on x86-64 Pavel Machek
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.