Re: The return of the return of crunch time (2.5 merge candidate list 1.6)

From: Pavel Machek (
Date: Tue Jan 15 2002 - 12:44:28 EST


> The point of my patchkit is to allow the file systems
> who support better resolution to handle it properly. Other filesystems
> are not worse than before when they flush inodes (and better off when
> they keep everything in ram for your build because then they will enjoy
> full time resolution)

What about always rounding down even when inode is
in memory? That is both simple and consistent.

> If you really wanted that I would recommend to change make.
> When all nanosecond parts are 0 it is reasonable for make to assume that
> the fs doesn't support finegrained resolution. But I'm not sure it's
> worth it.

Thats really ugly heuristics. What about filling
nanosecond part with ~0 when unavailable?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 15 2002 - 22:00:16 EST