From: "Michael Kjörling" <michael@kjorling.se>
To: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org
Subject: Re: [TUHS] The 2038 bug...
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2021 18:20:42 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d0935488-ddd6-4d99-a034-c14305e62995@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEdTPBeiKfSau8SD9Y1ru427Z3XErSNzCtwaF7CwFcKQGvcftg@mail.gmail.com>
On 6 Jan 2021 12:08 -0500, from henry.r.bent@gmail.com (Henry Bent):
>> On recent Linux/i386 kernels it's actually 64 bits. In practice, only
>> users who are stuck with old i386 Linux versions will have a problem.
>
> Do you happen to know what the cutoff is? Are 2.6 kernels (still very
> common) safe? 3.x? 4.x?
I haven't dug particularly deeply, but unless I am missing something,
Debian Buster's 4.19 kernel seems to map `time_t` to plain `long`
regardless of architecture. I don't have an i386 architecture system
handy, but wouldn't that make it 32 bits wide on i386 & Co?
linux/time.h:
struct timespec {
__kernel_time_t tv_sec; /* seconds */
long tv_nsec; /* nanoseconds */
};
asm-generic/posix_types.h:
#ifndef __kernel_long_t
typedef long __kernel_long_t;
typedef unsigned long __kernel_ulong_t;
#endif
/* ... */
typedef __kernel_long_t __kernel_time_t;
Both from Debian's linux-libc-dev package, version 4.19.160-2, amd64
architecture.
If that's right, then I'd definitely expect anything 2.x and 3.x to be
unsafe, and 4.x to at best be suspect; so Dario's mention of 5.6
doesn't sound unreasonable as a first guess.
We've got maybe fifteen years before this starts to become a real
issue. Time to start working on those upgrade plans...
--
Michael Kjörling • https://michael.kjorling.se • michael@kjorling.se
“Remember when, on the Internet, nobody cared that you were a dog?”
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-06 18:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-31 7:19 Dave Horsfall
2020-12-31 7:24 ` Niklas Karlsson
2020-12-31 8:10 ` arnold
2020-12-31 15:30 ` Warner Losh
2020-12-31 16:09 ` Adam Thornton
2020-12-31 16:12 ` Larry McVoy
2021-01-11 7:18 ` alan
2021-01-11 14:01 ` Stuart Remphrey
2020-12-31 18:36 ` Theodore Ts'o
2020-12-31 21:34 ` Warner Losh
2021-01-06 16:32 ` Dario Niedermann
2021-01-06 17:08 ` Henry Bent
2021-01-06 18:05 ` Dario Niedermann
2021-01-06 18:20 ` Michael Kjörling [this message]
2021-01-06 21:09 ` Dave Horsfall
2020-12-31 19:18 ` Bakul Shah
2021-01-04 8:22 ` Peter Jeremy via TUHS
2021-01-04 9:13 ` Angus Robinson
2021-01-04 21:49 ` Dave Horsfall
2021-01-04 21:56 ` Warner Losh
2021-01-05 18:05 ` Dan Cross
2021-01-06 7:21 ` Warner Losh
2021-01-07 22:56 ` Stuart Remphrey
2021-01-08 1:25 ` Nemo Nusquam
2021-01-10 6:56 ` Stuart Remphrey
2021-01-04 8:59 ` Sergio Pedraja
2021-01-07 22:50 ` Stuart Remphrey
2021-01-10 7:16 ` Valdimar Sigurdsson
2021-01-10 7:24 ` Niklas Karlsson
2021-01-10 10:15 ` Stuart Remphrey
2020-12-31 15:05 M Douglas McIlroy
2020-12-31 16:51 ` arnold
2020-12-31 23:31 ` Steffen Nurpmeso
2021-01-09 8:44 Norman Wilson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d0935488-ddd6-4d99-a034-c14305e62995@localhost \
--to=michael@kjorling.se \
--cc=tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).