Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mail-we0-f173.google.com ([74.125.82.173]:33788 "EHLO mail-we0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751329AbaEaSXO (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 May 2014 14:23:14 -0400 Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 20:22:37 +0200 From: Richard Cochran To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, hpa@zytor.com, logfs@logfs.org, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, joseph@codesourcery.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, codalist@TELEMANN.coda.cs.cmu.edu, cluster-devel@redhat.com, coda@cs.cmu.edu, geert@linux-m68k.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, john.stultz@linaro.org, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, lftan@altera.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC 00/32] making inode time stamps y2038 ready Message-ID: <20140531182237.GA5382@localhost.localdomain> References: <1401480116-1973111-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <20140531145114.GA3721@localhost.localdomain> <6347520.8jMPlVsFjM@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <6347520.8jMPlVsFjM@wuerfel> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 05:23:02PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > It's an approximation: (Approximately never ;) > with 64-bit timestamps, you can represent close to 300 billion > years, which is way past the time that our planet can sustain > life of any form[1]. Did you mean mean 64 bits worth of seconds? 2^64 / (3600*24*365) = 584,942,417,355 That is more than 300 billion years, and still, it is not quite the same as "never". In any case, that term is not too helpful in the comparison table, IMHO. One could think that some sort of clever running count relative to the last mount time was implied. Thanks, Richard [1] You are forgetting the immortal robotic overlords.