On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 1:09 AM Amir Goldstein <amir7...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I understand why you dislike the ext2+loop test, but please hear me out.
> > >
> > > From all the fs types that are supported by the test, only btrfs and ext4 
> > > with
> > > large inode size are y2038 ready.
> > > For the rest of the cases, we actually have a way to detect kernel support
> > > from the dmesg warning, without the need for hacky ext2 loop mount.
> > >
> > > So how about just:
> > > 1. moving  _scratch_mount before _require_timestamp_range
> > > 2. in _require_timestamp_range (untested):
> > >         if [ $tsmax -lt $((1<<32)) ] && ! _check_dmesg_for "supports
> >
> > Yeah, this looks fine. I thought about searching for dmesg warning after
> > _scratch_mount as well, but that would _notrun if the fs is 2038-safe.
> > This $tsmax check fixes my concern. Thanks!
> >
>
> Deepa,
>
> Do you intend to post the simplified version or would you like me
> to re-spin your patch?

I intend to do this. Sorry, was distracted by other things. FWIW, just
(1<<32) is not enough. The kernel prints this warning based on
(current time + max uptime) <= tsmax. Will post this.

-Deepa
_______________________________________________
Y2038 mailing list
Y2038@lists.linaro.org
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/y2038

Reply via email to