On Sat, 2005-01-15 at 22:46 -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Jan 14, 2005 22:16 +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > +static inline struct timespec ext3_current_time(struct inode *inode)
> > +{
> > + return (inode->i_sb->s_time_gran == 1) ?
> > + CURRENT_TIME : CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
> > +
On Sunday 16 January 2005 05:37, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Andreas Gruenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > this is a spin-off of an old patch by Alex Tomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Alex originally had nanosecond timestamps in his original patch; here is
> > a rejuvenated version. Please tell me what
On Jan 14, 2005 22:16 +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> this is a spin-off of an old patch by Alex Tomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Alex originally had nanosecond timestamps in his original patch; here is
> a rejuvenated version. Please tell me what you think. Alex also added a
> create timestamp in
Andreas Gruenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> this is a spin-off of an old patch by Alex Tomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Alex originally had nanosecond timestamps in his original patch; here is
> a rejuvenated version. Please tell me what you think. Alex also added a
> create timestamp in his ori
Hello,
this is a spin-off of an old patch by Alex Tomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Alex originally had nanosecond timestamps in his original patch; here is
a rejuvenated version. Please tell me what you think. Alex also added a
create timestamp in his original patch. Do we actually need that?
Nanosecon
5 matches
Mail list logo
