Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork33.7k
gh-83714: Fix stat_nanosecond_timestamp() for 32-bit time_t#141069
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
vstinner commentedNov 5, 2025
!buildbot x86 Debian |
bedevere-bot commentedNov 5, 2025
🤖 New build scheduled with the buildbot fleet by@vstinner for commit6e56143 🤖 Results will be shown at: https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/grid?branch=refs%2Fpull%2F141069%2Fmerge The command will test the builders whose names match following regular expression: The builders matched are:
|
| { | ||
| #ifSIZEOF_LONG >=8 | ||
| #ifSIZEOF_TIME_T==4 | ||
| returnPyLong_FromLongLong(sec*SEC_TO_NS+nsec); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
What is the type of SEC_TO_NS? Should not it orsec be cast tolong long?
We will get a warning also in the very unlikely case of more than 64-bitlong long. Maybe use conditionSIZEOF_TIME_T + 4 <= SIZEOF_LONG_LONG?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
What is the type of SEC_TO_NS?
It's a long long: it uses theLL suffix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
We will get a warning also in the very unlikely case of more than 64-bit long long.
I don't see which kind of warning would be emitted if long long is larger than 64-bit?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
The same warning. If long long is 128-bit and time_t is 64-bit, then the condition(LLONG_MIN/SEC_TO_NS) <= sec && sec <= (LLONG_MAX/SEC_TO_NS - 1) will be tested, and it will be always true.
I do not know if Python is currently used on any platform with larger than 64-bit long long. This is hypothetical.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
Anyway, this would be just a warning. Not wrong code or missed optimization.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
If long long is 128-bit and time_t is 64-bit
Oh ok. Well, I expect many warnings if long long is larger than 64-bit, not just on these lines. We can revisit the code once such platform will exist :-)
serhiy-storchaka left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
LGTM. 👍
| { | ||
| #ifSIZEOF_LONG >=8 | ||
| #ifSIZEOF_TIME_T==4 | ||
| returnPyLong_FromLongLong(sec*SEC_TO_NS+nsec); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
Anyway, this would be just a warning. Not wrong code or missed optimization.
vstinner commentedNov 5, 2025
The warnings are still fixed with this PR on x86 Debian:https://buildbot.python.org/#/builders/1285/builds/531 |
986bb0a intopython:mainUh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.