Mingming Cao wrote:
On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 15:58 +0530, Kalpak Shah wrote:
On Sun, 2007-07-01 at 03:36 -0400, Mingming Cao wrote:
+
+#define EXT4_INODE_GET_XTIME(xtime, inode, raw_inode) \
+do { \
+ (inode)->xtime.tv_sec = le32_to_cpu((raw_inode)->xtime); \
+ if (EXT4_FITS_IN_INODE(raw_inode, EXT4_I(inode), xtime ## _extra)) \
+ ext4_decode_extra_time(&(inode)->xtime, \
+ raw_inode->xtime ## _extra); \
+} while (0)
+
+#define EXT4_EINODE_GET_XTIME(xtime, einode, raw_inode) \
+do { \
+ if (EXT4_FITS_IN_INODE(raw_inode, einode, xtime)) \
+ (einode)->xtime.tv_sec = le32_to_cpu((raw_inode)->xtime); \
+ if (EXT4_FITS_IN_INODE(raw_inode, einode, xtime ## _extra)) \
+ ext4_decode_extra_time(&(einode)->xtime, \
+ raw_inode->xtime ## _extra); \
+} while (0)
+
This nanosecond patch seems to be missing the fix below which is required for http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5079
If the timestamp is set to before epoch i.e. a negative timestamp then the file may have its date set into the future on 64-bit systems. So when the timestamp is read it must be cast as signed.
Missed this one.
Thanks. Will update ext4 patch queue tonight with this fix.
IIRC in the conference call it was decided to not to apply this patch. Andreas may be able to update better.
-aneesh
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
