Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm trying to understand what that means for the 64-bit time_t syscalls. > > The patch series I did last year had a replacement 'sys_newfstatat()' > syscall but IIRC no other stat variant, the idea being that we would > only need to provide this one to the libc and have user space emulate > the stat/fstat/lstat/fstatat variants based on that. > With the statx introduction, I was hoping to no longer have to add > that syscall but instead have libc do everything on top of sys_statx(). > > Do you think that is reasonable, given that we won't be allowed to > call any of the existing stat() variants for a y2038-safe libc build[1], > or should we plan to keep needing replacement fstatat (and possibly > stat/lstat/fstat) syscalls with 64-bit time_t even after statx() support > is merged into the kernel. Christoph? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
