[f2fs-dev] Toutes Vos maquettes print et web au meilleur prix

2014-06-06 Thread netcomdesign
Madame, Monsieur, Notre société réalise des maquettes de flyers, affiches, cartes postales, bâches, PLV, ainsi que le design de votre site internet. Nos prix démarrent à 30 € la maquette. Consultez quelques unes de nos réalisations : www.netcomdesign.fr Nous vous proposons également des tarifs

Re: [f2fs-dev] [RFC 00/32] making inode time stamps y2038 ready

2014-06-06 Thread Nicolas Pitre
On Wed, 4 Jun 2014, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 03 June 2014, Dave Chinner wrote: > > Just ot be pedantic, inodes don't need 96 bit timestamps - some > > filesystems can *support up to* 96 bit timestamps. If the kernel > > only supports 64 bit timestamps and that's all the kernel can > > rep

Re: [f2fs-dev] [RFC 00/32] making inode time stamps y2038 ready

2014-06-06 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Monday 02 June 2014, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Mon, 2 Jun 2014, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > Ok. Sorry about missing linux-api, I confused it with linux-arch, which > > may not be as relevant here, except for the one question whether we > > actually want to have the new ABI on all 32-bit archit

Re: [f2fs-dev] [RFC 00/32] making inode time stamps y2038 ready

2014-06-06 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Tuesday 03 June 2014, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 04:22:19PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Monday 02 June 2014 14:57:26 H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > On 06/02/2014 12:55 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > The possible uses I can see for non-ktime_t types in the kernel are: > > * i

Re: [f2fs-dev] [RFC 00/32] making inode time stamps y2038 ready

2014-06-06 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 06/04/2014 12:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > For other timekeeping stuff in the kernel, I agree that using some > 64-bit representation (nanoseconds, 32/32 unsigned seconds/nanoseconds, > ...) has advantages, that's exactly the point I was making earlier > against simply extending the internal

Re: [f2fs-dev] [RFC 00/32] making inode time stamps y2038 ready

2014-06-06 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Wednesday 04 June 2014 13:30:32 Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Wed, 4 Jun 2014, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Tuesday 03 June 2014, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > Just ot be pedantic, inodes don't need 96 bit timestamps - some > > > filesystems can *support up to* 96 bit timestamps. If the kernel > > > o