This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [[PATCH RFC 2] 02/63] Y2038: add function __difftime64

From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
To: Albert ARIBAUD <albert dot aribaud at 3adev dot fr>, Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>
Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 09:46:19 +0200
Subject: Re: [[PATCH RFC 2] 02/63] Y2038: add function __difftime64
References: <20180418201819.15952-1-albert.aribaud@3adev.fr> <20180418201819.15952-2-albert.aribaud@3adev.fr> <20180418201819.15952-3-albert.aribaud@3adev.fr> <0a04fc43-9e92-1bbc-843d-049d1026d971@cs.ucla.edu> <20180419150411.4d7ee629@athena> <34e2461c-5da4-181d-d34b-b63c7f89dbf6@cs.ucla.edu> <20180502092209.540847ad@athena>

On 05/02/2018 09:22 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:

IOW: does the set of 32-bit architectures on which we will use
64-bit with 32-bit time need all the complexities of current difftime?
I'm thinking for instance about padding bits.

Yes, you can simplify the code if you want, assuming that time_t doesn'thave padding bits, and even hard-code the matching unsigned type.


Thanks,
Florian

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [[PATCH RFC 2] 02/63] Y2038: add function __difftime64
  - From: Albert ARIBAUD
- Re: [[PATCH RFC 2] 02/63] Y2038: add function __difftime64
  - From: Paul Eggert

References:
- Re: [[PATCH RFC 2] 02/63] Y2038: add function __difftime64
  - From: Albert ARIBAUD

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]