The following reply was made to PR kern/31430; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Simon Burge <simonb@wasabisystems.com>
To: YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp>
Cc: christos@netbsd.org, gnats-bugs@netbsd.org,
	kern-bug-people@netbsd.org, gnats-admin@netbsd.org,
	netbsd-bugs@netbsd.org
Subject: Re: kern/31430: ptyfs isn't getting mtime right 
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 02:36:20 +1000

 YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
 
 > > The patch below is a result of a discussion off-line with Christos.
 > > The granularity of the mtime doesn't need to be down to the nanosecond
 > > - using the kernel "time" variable (which is updated on each
 > > hardclock call) saves a potentially relatively expensive call to
 > > microtime/nanotime for each write, and is more than accurate enough to
 > > track pty idle times.
 > 
 > it isn't good to mix "time" and nanotime
 > because it can make timestamps go backward sometimes.
 
 You're suggesting that ptyfs_itimes() use "time" as well if any of the
 timespec pointers are NULL then?  Or a different solution?
 
 Cheers,
 Simon.
 --
 Simon Burge                            <simonb@wasabisystems.com>
 NetBSD Support and Service:         http://www.wasabisystems.com/