On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 08:19:21PM -0400, Valdis Klētnieks wrote:
> In that case, rather than removing it, shouldn't we be *adding*
> code to properly set it instead?
Right, setting the UtcOffset fields to 0 is the first step marking
them as invalid for now. This is also why access_time_ms did
On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 07:50:31PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> Wait, how are these "duplicate"? The fields are in different order,
> don't these refer to things on-disk?
On-disk combines the values from these structures in a different form:
offset bits
DoubleSeconds 0 5
On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 07:54:24PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 05:35:37PM +, Valentin Vidic wrote:
> > +struct timestamp_t {
> > + u16 millisec; /* 0 ~ 999 */
>
> You added this field to this structure, why? You did not document that
> in
On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 05:40:40PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 04:10:15PM +, Valentin Vidic wrote:
> > void fat_set_entry_time(struct dentry_t *p_entry, struct timestamp_t *tp,
> > u8 mode)
> > {
> > + u8 ms;
> > u16 t, d;
> >
On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 02:03:37PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> Please run checkpatch on your patches so that we don't have to go and
> fix up those issues later on.
Strange, it did not report anything for me:
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 439 lines checked
On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 09:38:55AM +, David Laight wrote:
> From: Valentin Vidic
> > Sent: 03 September 2019 19:12
> > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:32:49PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:47:32PM +0200, Valentin Vidic wrote:
> > > > + } else if (uni
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:32:49PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:47:32PM +0200, Valentin Vidic wrote:
> > + } else if (uni == 0x) {
> > skip = TRUE;
>
> While we are at it, could you get rid of that 'TRUE' macro?
Sure, but
