Re: Change time_t to signed type

On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 3:42 AM Gregory Nutt wrote: > > > On 11/7/2024 12:34 PM, Tomek CEDRO wrote: > > Still it will be possible to set _by_hand_ other values (i.e. int32_t > > or uint32_t) via kconfig when necessary for older / smaller platforms. > > But not POSIX 2024 compliant. We have forbid

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 7:42 PM Gregory Nutt wrote: > On 11/7/2024 12:34 PM, Tomek CEDRO wrote: > > Still it will be possible to set _by_hand_ other values (i.e. int32_t > > or uint32_t) via kconfig when necessary for older / smaller platforms. > > But not POSIX 2024 compliant. We have forbid non-

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 7:01 PM Gregory Nutt wrote: > On 11/7/2024 10:59 AM, Tomek CEDRO wrote: > > Does adding kconfig's configurable time_t with uint32_t default > > (as-is) with option to change int32_t and int64_t sounds good? Should > > we use manual selection only or auto-detection (i.e. int6

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On 11/7/2024 12:34 PM, Tomek CEDRO wrote: Still it will be possible to set _by_hand_ other values (i.e. int32_t or uint32_t) via kconfig when necessary for older / smaller platforms. But not POSIX 2024 compliant.  We have forbid non-compliant options in the past.  The option would basic say

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 2:11 PM Gregory Nutt wrote: > Here are solutions and details of implementations as implemented by > other OSs and file systems (the year 2038 problem does apply to > timestamps and meta-data in file systems too! Including NFS). See > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On 11/7/2024 10:59 AM, Tomek CEDRO wrote: Does adding kconfig's configurable time_t with uint32_t default (as-is) with option to change int32_t and int64_t sounds good? Should we use manual selection only or auto-detection (i.e. int64_t on 64-bit archs)? :-) /Initial Response / Not re

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 4:38 PM Gregory Nutt wrote: > > On 11/7/2024 12:57 AM, Takashi Yamamoto wrote: > >> my suggestion is to keep our time_t unsigned for now and revisit > >> when/if we solve the issues of targets w/o 64-bit integers. > >> (either by improving the toolchains, or stop supporting

RE: [EXT] Re: RPMsg FS on NuttX and Linux

Hi Wang Bowen, Xiang Xiao, When I want to move a file through rpmsgfs from within nuttx on a filesystem hosted on linux, then I get this linux kernel oops below. I used the rpmsgfs linux implementation provided on this mail thread but ported it to 6.6.23. It looks like every move or rename give

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On 11/7/2024 5:00 AM, michal.lyszc...@bofc.pl wrote: Having code we know is going to crap out in the near future is kinda strange design choice. I think you could have ignored it when there was 50 years left, but this will happen in 14 years which is not that far for embedded systems that can wor

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On 11/7/2024 12:57 AM, Takashi Yamamoto wrote: my suggestion is to keep our time_t unsigned for now and revisit when/if we solve the issues of targets w/o 64-bit integers. (either by improving the toolchains, or stop supporting those targets, or inventing a way to workaround the year 2038 issu

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On 11/7/2024 12:57 AM, Takashi Yamamoto wrote: my suggestion is to keep our time_t unsigned for now and revisit when/if we solve the issues of targets w/o 64-bit integers. (either by improving the toolchains, or stop supporting those targets, or inventing a way to workaround the year 2038 issue

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 7:57 AM Takashi Yamamoto wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 6:52 PM Tomek CEDRO wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 5:21 AM Takashi Yamamoto > > wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 1:05 PM Tomek CEDRO wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 4:45 AM Takashi Yamamoto > > > > wrot

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 12:01 PM wrote: > On 2024-11-06 10:01:55, Nathan Hartman wrote: > > I am +1 for a Kconfig. > > > > * or just make the default 64-bit on ALL systems, and if you are > > trimming resources, you can make a judgment call whether to reduce it > > to 32-bit > > I would say this. >

Re: Change time_t to signed type

On 2024-11-06 10:01:55, Nathan Hartman wrote: > I am +1 for a Kconfig. > > * or just make the default 64-bit on ALL systems, and if you are > trimming resources, you can make a judgment call whether to reduce it > to 32-bit I would say this. I believe defaults should be what works for majority o