Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Y2038 proposal

Richard Purdie

On Wed, 2022-11-30 at 09:07 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
On Tue, 29 Nov 2022 at 16:45, Stephen Jolley <> wrote:
We’d welcome a proposal/series on how to move forward with the Y2038 work for 32 bit platforms.
I have the following proposal:

1. A branch is made where:
a. "-D_TIME_BITS=64 -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64" is enabled globally.
b. qemu is always started with "-rtc base=2040-01-01", simulating
Y2038 actually occurring.
c. an additional runtime test verifies that both RTC clock and system
clock report 2040.

2. This branch is run through a-full on the autobuilder. Any uncovered
issues are filed as bugs.

3. Once *all* of the bugs are addressed, repeat point 2.

4. Once there are no more open bugs, 1a is merged into master.

Any fatal flaws in the plan?
Others have made some good comments. My thoughts:

* We need to add some runtime tests to oeqa for this (in addition to
the ptests)

* We need to have a 32 bit ptest run on the autobuilder (qemux86 should
work, not sure we can make qemuarm fast). Whether this is manually
triggered, not sure. We could have a smaller set of ptests to run for

* Could we optionally disable some of the glibc 32 bit function calls
to ensure they're not being used? We don't really want to diverge from
upstream glibc much though.

* We need to work out how to communicate this change happened and have
people "buy in" to it. The reason for that is that if someone has
existing binaries, there could be problems using them after the change.
We therefore need to be sure they are aware of it.



Join { to automatically receive all group messages.