From owner-freebsd-arch Mon Oct 29 10:40:12 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.123.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 585B637B421 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:40:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from caddis.yogotech.com (caddis.yogotech.com [206.127.123.130]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA25437; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:40:01 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate@yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by caddis.yogotech.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id f9TIe1A18619; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:40:01 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate) From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15325.41600.832823.952280@caddis.yogotech.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:40:00 -0700 To: Julian Elischer Cc: Nate Williams , Poul-Henning Kamp , Peter Wemm , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. In-Reply-To: References: <15325.36894.320057.967406@caddis.yogotech.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.95 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > yes you are right here.. > > But the two TOP bits of the nanosecond fields > are by definition always 0 > (you can only have up to 1,000,000,000 nano seconds in a partial second) > and 32 bits goes up to 4(American)billion, so the two top bits can safely > be used for multiplying the seconds scale by 4. (in UFS timestamps.. > you would never write a non-normalised time to disk) > also timestamps can't be before 1970 so making it unsigned > allows us to go to 2100+ and mutiplying it by for takes us to about 2600.. All I can say is *yuck*. Nate > > > >ufs has enough room to fix this.. > > > >there has been a field defined in the on disk inode for nanosecs > > > >in each of the time values... > > > >if we take the lowest 8 bits of that field and re-assign it to be > > > >the highest 8 bits of the seconds, then we have time accuracy down to > > > >microseconds still and we expand file times by a factor > > > >of 256 (which is all of recorded history plus some) > > > > > > > >we just always set those bits to 0 for the next 37 years and we don;t > > > >really lose time resolution and we gain compatibility with the future.. > > > >nothing these days has nonosecond resolution there anyhow.... > > > > Simply not true. We have pico second resolution in our product, which > > is necessary because we're using *really* fast transports, and need to > > do very precise timing. > > > > (We're not using FreeBSD now, but if we need that kind of resolution in > > 2001, I can easily see the need for much higher resolution in the > > future.) > > > > I'm with PHK here (can you believe it?). :) :) > > > > > > Nate > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message