This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH v7] y2038: Introduce __ASSUME_TIME64_SYSCALLS define
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Lukasz Majewski <lukma at denx dot de>
- Cc: <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Stepan Golosunov <stepan at golosunov dot pp dot ru>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb dot de>, Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 22:50:10 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] y2038: Introduce __ASSUME_TIME64_SYSCALLS define
- References: <20190611160243.3134-1-lukma@denx.de> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1906131618180.7816@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20190614003426.0097d4cf@jawa>
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> If I may ask - do I need to further fix/re-word in-patch comment and
> patch description?
>
> Is it precise and semantically correct?
Well, "present 64 bit time support" seems a bad way to describe support as
of 5.0 and before (i.e. past support). Likewise the "currently provide 64
bit time support" description for the same class of systems. Descriptions
like that in terms of what's "current" in some external piece of software
are always going to be problematic in comments.
The relevant class of systems you're trying to describe isn't ones with
"present" or "current" support for 64-bit time (as of now, all Linux
kernel architectures currently have such support). It's ones with such
support *with unsuffixed syscall names* (in distinction to those systems
where the support is with syscalls with a "time64" suffix).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com