From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Sep 2 12:42:29 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E866037B400 for ; Mon, 2 Sep 2002 12:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D3AD43E3B for ; Mon, 2 Sep 2002 12:42:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: from apollo.backplane.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apollo.backplane.com (8.12.5/8.12.4) with ESMTP id g82JgIPQ032729; Mon, 2 Sep 2002 12:42:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.12.5/8.12.4/Submit) id g82JgIZn032728; Mon, 2 Sep 2002 12:42:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 12:42:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <200209021942.g82JgIZn032728@apollo.backplane.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit API/ABI changes proposal for -current References: <55509.1030995196@critter.freebsd.dk> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :> :> All right, I'll amend the proposal to use 2^64. the fractional :> element will be unsigned, the tv_sec will remain signed. : :That is exactly how bintime is defined :-) : : struct bintime { : time_t sec; : uint64_t frac; : }; : :If I had a int128_t, I would have used that instead... : : :-- :Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 Ok, we have an issue in regards to libc/user function visibility. The bintime structures and functions are surrounded by __BSD_VISIBLE. The question to you and to the list in general is: what to call the user-visible structure. 'bintime' is a cute name, I certainly like it better then timeval64, and we could probably get away with calling the user visible structure bintime, but I don't know if we can get away with including all the supporting inline functions (not that we necessarily have to include them for the syscall work, but it would be nice). Also, the in-kernel time_t is 32 bits on 32 bit architectures so bintime is not compatible as-is, but it would not be much work to make bintime use time64_t. We can't create yet another userland time structure without making seconds 64 bits. -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message