From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sage Weil Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] libceph: validate timespec conversions Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <2011602102.65.1366647123451.JavaMail.root@thunderbeast.private.linuxbox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from cobra.newdream.net ([66.33.216.30]:33970 "EHLO cobra.newdream.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753440Ab3DVQWu (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:22:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: <2011602102.65.1366647123451.JavaMail.root@thunderbeast.private.linuxbox.com> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "Matt W. Benjamin" Cc: Alex Elder , ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 22 Apr 2013, Matt W. Benjamin wrote: > I was thinking about the seconds component. Oh, right.. that's the unix epoch(alypse) in 2038 or something? That we should probably fix. :) s > > ----- "Sage Weil" wrote: > > > On Mon, 22 Apr 2013, Matt W. Benjamin wrote: > > > > > > ----- "Alex Elder" wrote: > > > > > > > A ceph timespec contains 32-bit unsigned values for its seconds > > and > > > > nanoseconds components. For a standard timespec, both fields are > > > > signed, and the seconds field is almost surely 64 bits. > > > > > > Is the Ceph timespec going to change at some point? > > > > I don't think so. 32-bits is enough for the billion nanoseconds in a > > > > second. And I'm not sure if the signedness is used/useful... the ceph > > > > utime_t code always normalizes the ns result to be in [0, 1 billion). > > > > sage > > > -- > Matt Benjamin > The Linux Box > 206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150 > Ann Arbor, MI 48104 > > http://linuxbox.com > > tel. 734-761-4689 > fax. 734-769-8938 > cel. 734-216-5309 > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > >