Received: by 2002:ac0:aed5:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id t21csp5262608imb; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 11:23:08 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxr8HOxdJ0UTUyUGyvQaKEkM4HRYRRC7Hs5CCPCOoKa3bJPyOvQbVrElFp0EzQx/FJ/Soch X-Received: by 2002:a63:f558:: with SMTP id e24mr12673806pgk.373.1551986588450; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 11:23:08 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1551986588; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Y6a7Ng07mulngDKxWfiUdYLlYGORupjjipxQd3sfrkkWp8ZOsSgCZfK6L6mhmyN0jR DInkqti+l5KMrBnZsjZe0QDKnEoi2OL5FVs+6VaHNkiKK2ohtodL+KAlh0R25J7MMW5y 6aEO188G+QH0mzXWsJ0Z4wrTelF+zxPxwafxnoAvivnKWqtHrFnPAdvU0xIAlk2h/iTR MP4tGrYXAJ5Xor6VU0pBJATHCF9cBAtN+Of07ARX/6LEp5YhtGq+jxIPgir/CNzwHCbe z9aq3tJfLZ20Buz0a7qXlhXbq6sQ8B4nJ9iFTFQtjIt6OidyZtfCXsK6NYqpk41vGsjk tbdw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:user-agent:references :message-id:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=KoD4zG1ukL67o6KGtSYc0jS9etFiE/ZS0w6h1JePJG0=; b=Sfw3/0DzGXLgK0Td73xeh1SZey4iFhMuYf8GDIbcs6IDjdmUpxZQ0RT50zUHjA2EVc lS/UAS1UuB0RA45iKOA85fqX1ByTStenAgSgtNOEYEtM4iFcn0/FtgvrkVHfBYEJZBJk EIz7v0xLie8MKhlQhZkKAVk/szMVLgwjmfDIXUOkGOCH9kWlA5AHhlpBwB3tLNbcfLTw uHyfgq+TGK2sD0vMOKeTpuLU5/qYeBWAHmn0Ll1cNQxSIt8T93/xNYqBhcpbFHvjz3jL U68Ktjvww4Lw4yOUUHVORTpvi/lwSbWQZDTyaYuyBuI5xBxX7EsQrd+B1ycukxGT4lE9 DKCw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z24si4671959pfa.94.2019.03.07.11.22.51; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 11:23:08 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726716AbfCGTU7 (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 7 Mar 2019 14:20:59 -0500 Received: from relay1.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.131]:58733 "EHLO relay1.mentorg.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726233AbfCGTU6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Mar 2019 14:20:58 -0500 Received: from nat-ies.mentorg.com ([192.94.31.2] helo=svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384:256) id 1h1yZS-0002WZ-W7 from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 11:20:47 -0800 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.90) by svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 19:20:43 +0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1h1yZP-0004QY-3c; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 19:20:43 +0000 Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 19:20:43 +0000 From: Joseph Myers X-X-Sender: jsm28@digraph.polyomino.org.uk To: Lukasz Majewski CC: Zack Weinberg , Arnd Bergmann , Linux Kernel Mailing List , GNU C Library Subject: Re: [Y2038] Question regarding support of old time interfaces beyond y2038 In-Reply-To: <20190307085329.2b6cbeb7@jawa> Message-ID: References: <20190305162351.5aadde66@jawa> <20190307085329.2b6cbeb7@jawa> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Originating-IP: [137.202.0.90] X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) To svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 7 Mar 2019, Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > 1) We should be clear that most of these will continue to be supported > > as C library interfaces even if they are not system calls. Some of > > them are obsolete enough and/or rarely used enough that we might not > > bother (the older ways to set the system clock, for instance). > > The question here is about the decision if even the old time APIs shall > be supported on 32 bit systems which are going to be Y2038 proof (like > the 'stime'). The glibc API should support the same set of functions both with and without _TIME_BITS=64. I think it would be reasonable to obsolete the stime function in glibc (meaning turn it into a compat symbol, not available for linking new programs and not present at all for new architectures). But that's orthogonal to supporting 64-bit times on 32-bit platforms in glibc. If stime is obsoleted before (or in the same release as) that 64-bit time support, no 64-bit version of stime is needed in glibc. If obsoleted in a later release, glibc would need to get a 64-bit version (and both versions would turn into compat symbols if the interface is obsoleted). -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com