Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201030110229.43f0773b@jawa> <20201030135816.GA1790@yuki.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20201030135816.GA1790@yuki.lan>
From:   Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>
Date:   Fri, 30 Oct 2020 10:02:29 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKCAbMgemuaG61seKMvhjOHdPCEQJRQBiQgzcf_eO=xm2t+KBw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Y2038][time namespaces] Question regarding CLOCK_REALTIME
 support plans in Linux time namespaces
To:     Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
Cc:     Lukasz Majewski <lukma@denx.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Andrei Vagin <avagin@gmail.com>,
        GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 9:57 AM Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz> wrote:
> > According to patch description [1] and time_namespaces documentation
> > [2] the CLOCK_REALTIME is not supported (for now?) to avoid complexity
> > and overhead in the kernel.
...
> > To be more specific - [if this were supported] it would be possible to modify time after time_t
> > 32 bit overflow (i.e. Y2038 bug) on the process running Y2038
> > regression tests on the host system (64 bit one). By using Linux time
> > namespaces the system time will not be affected in any way.
>
> And what's exactly wrong with moving the system time forward for a
> duration of the test?

Interference with other processes on the same computer?  Some of us
*do* like to run the glibc test suite on computers not entirely
devoted to glibc CI.

zw