Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)

[Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>]

On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 2:15 PM Lukasz Majewski <lukma@denx.de> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:37 AM Lukasz Majewski <lukma@denx.de>
> > wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:11 AM Lukasz Majewski <lukma@denx.de>
> > > > Are there any glibc issues that prevent it from working
> > > > correctly,
> > >
> > > I think that the glibc wrappers for most important syscalls are now
> > > converted.
> > >
> > > What is missing:
> > >
> > > - NTPL (threads)
> > > - stat
> >
> > Do you mean that code using these will fail to work correctly with
> > -D_TIME_BITS=64 at the moment, or that the interfaces are there
> > but they are not y2038 safe?
>
> For ARM32 (branch [2]):
>
> - Without -D_TIME_BITS=64 defined during compilation (as we do have
>   now) the glibc is fully functional, but when you set date after
>   03:14:08 UTC on 19.01.2038 you will see the date reset (to 1901) in
>   the user space programs (after calling e.g. 'date').

I'd actually consider intentionally breaking this for a Debian bootstrap,
at least initially, so that any application that accidentally gets built without
 -D_TIME_BITS=64 runs into a build or link failure.

> - With -D_TIME_BITS=64 set during compilation - and using branch [2] -
>   syscalls listed in [1] will provide correct date after Y2038 32 bit
>   overflow. Other (i.e. not converted ones) will use overflow date (1901
>   year). The glibc will also be fully functional up till Y2038 overflow.

Ok.

> > > - In-glibc test coverage when -D_TIME_BITS=64 is used. I do have
> > >   some basic tests [4], but this may be not enough.
> >
> > This is probably something where debian-rebootstrap could help,
> > as building and testing more user space packages will excercise
> > additional code paths in glibc as well.
>
> Yes this _could_ help. Do you have any tutorial/howto similar to one
> from [4]?

Not sure, maybe Helmut has some references.

> > There is also some work
> > in Linaro to ensure that LTP tests the low-level syscall interfaces
> > in both the time32 and time64 variants.
>
> Interesting. Is this work now publicly available?

I think this is currently in the planning stage, but once patches
are available, they would be posted to the ltp mailing list. Viresh
should have more details on this.

       Arnd