Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2002 21:33:16 +0200 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit API/ABI changes proposal for -current Message-ID: <55509.1030995196@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 02 Sep 2002 12:28:35 PDT." <200209021928.g82JSZNK032622@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200209021928.g82JSZNK032622@apollo.backplane.com>, Matthew Dillon w
rites:
>
>:> struct timeval64 {
>:> time64_t tv_sec;
>:> int64_t tv_frac; /* N/2^63 fractional */
>:> };
>:
>:We have this one already, and it's called bintime, except that it
>:correctly uses N/2^64 fractional the way binary computers prefer it.
>:
>:--
>:Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
>
> Hmm. That's certainly a reasonable point. I suppose a negative
> representation is still possible if one considers the entire 128
> bit word as a 128 bit fractional time.
>
> 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
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55509.1030995196>