Re: [RFC 01/32] fs: introduce new 'struct inode_time'
From: Geert Uytterhoeven
Date: Sat May 31 2014 - 04:00:08 EST
Hi Arnd,
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> + * The variant using bit fields is less efficient to access, but
> + * small and has a wider range as the 32-bit one, plus it keeps
> + * the signedness of the original timespec.
> + */
> +struct inode_time {
> + long long tv_sec : 34;
> + int tv_nsec : 30;
> +};
Don't you need 31 bits for tv_nsec, to accommodate for the sign bit?
I know you won't really store negative numbers there, but storing a large
positive number will become negative on read out, won't it?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/