Re: [MirageOS-devel] Timestamp representation and CLOCK

[Richard Mortier <richard.mortier@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 9 July 2015 at 16:11, Daniel BÃnzli <daniel.buenzli@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Le jeudi, 9 juillet 2015 Ã 15:43, Richard Mortier a Ãcrit :
>> What range and precision do we want?
>
> In ptime I arbitrarily chose to represent UTC timeline of RFC 3339 can 
> represent (i.e. 0000-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 9999-12-31 23:59:59 UTC). I don't 
> have a particular strong opinion about the precision.
>
> It doesn't mean that we need to have the same representation capabilities as 
> ptime for the results given by CLOCK, but it seems to me that this ERP 64-bit 
> is a bit too constrained as it only allows to represent time from the epoch 
> 1970 until around 2106 CE (epoch + 2^32 / 86_400 / 365).
>

The 100 year old unikernel... :)

So
 epoch+2^33 secs with precision to 466ps => 2242CE
 epoch+2^34 secs with precision to 1ns => 2514CE

Or, Microsoft's FILETIME is uint64 representing the number of
100-nanosecond units since the start of January 1, 1601. (How far back
do we want to go?)

Or, given this is all in-unikernel (isn't it?) how about the unikernel
specifies it's own epoch and range (and/or precision) at compile time?

-- 
Richard Mortier
richard.mortier@xxxxxxxxxxxx

_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel