From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751082AbaBKFMn (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:12:43 -0500 Received: from hapkido.dreamhost.com ([66.33.216.122]:40525 "EHLO hapkido.dreamhost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750721AbaBKFMk (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:12:40 -0500 Message-ID: <1392095546.10065.56.camel@chiang> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: explain encoding of 34-bit a,c,mtime values From: David Turner To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" , Mark Harris , Andreas Dilger , Jan Kara , Ext4 Developers List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:12:26 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20140122062255.GA8973@birch.djwong.org> References: <1383808590.23882.13.camel@chiang> <20131107160341.GA3850@quack.suse.cz> <1383864864.23882.33.camel@chiang> <20131107231445.GG2054@quack.suse.cz> <1383866807.23882.41.camel@chiang> <1383981551.8994.27.camel@chiang> <1384070214.8994.47.camel@chiang> <20131112003018.GA30281@thunk.org> <20140122062255.GA8973@birch.djwong.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 22:22 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 07:30:18PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 02:56:54AM -0500, David Turner wrote: > > > b. Use Andreas's encoding, which is incompatible with pre-1970 files > > > written on 64-bit systems. > > > > > > I don't care about currently-existing post-2038 files, because I believe > > > that nobody has a valid reason to have such files. However, I do > > > believe that pre-1970 files are probably important to someone. > > > > > > Despite this, I prefer option (b), because I think the simplicity is > > > valuable, and because I hate to give up date ranges (even ones that I > > > think we'll "never" need). Option (b) is not actually lossy, because we > > > could correct pre-1970 files with e2fsck; under Andreas's encoding, > > > their dates would be in the far future (and thus cannot be legitimate). > > > > > > Would a patch that does (b) be accepted? I would accompany it with a > > > patch to e2fsck (which I assume would also go to the ext4 developers > > > mailing list?). > > > > I agree, I think this is the best way to go. I'm going to drop your > > earlier patch, and wait for an updated patch from you. It may miss > > this merge window, but as Andreas has pointed out, we still have a few > > years to get this right. :-) > > Just out of curiosity, did this (updated patch) ever happen? I think I sent a usable patch that Ted merged part of into e2fscktools; the kernel portion was dropped for some reason. While I was waiting to hear back on the kernel portion, I started looking into the dtime stuff, but then I got distracted by a new job. Assuming that I won't have time to deal with dtime (since it seems to be much more complicated), is the right way forward for me to rebase the non-dtime portion of my patch against the latest kernel, and resend it? If so, will it get merged? (Assume here that I do the same with the e2fsck stuff)