On December 1, 2014 9:11:21 PM CET, arno@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> For patch 1: Maybe point out that the issue with the century bit >isn't >> that critical, because this bit is not expected to be set before year >> 2100. > >It has: > > This was tested by putting a device 100 years in the future (using a > specific kernel due to the inability of userland tools such as date or >hwclock to pass year 2038), rebooting on a kernel w/ this patch applied > and verifying the device was still 100 years in the future. > That describes your test, but it doesn't rule out that someone might use the century bit to distinguish 19** and 20**. Best regards Uwe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
