linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] 2.6.18-rt7: fix more issues with 32-bit cycles_t in latency

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <457326A2.2020402@ru.mvista.com>
Date:	Sun, 03 Dec 2006 22:33:54 +0300
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>
To:	mingo@...e.hu
Cc:	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dwalker@...sta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.18-rt7: fix more issues with 32-bit cycles_t in	latency_trace.c
 (take 3)

Hello, I wrote:

> In addition to the clock jump-back check being falsely triggered by clock wrap
> with 32-bit cycles_t, as noticed by Kevin Hilman, there's another issue: using
> %Lx format to print 32-bit values warrants erroneous values on 32-bit machines
> like ARM and PPC32...

> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>

    What was the destiny of that patch? I haven't seen it accepted, haven't 
seen any comments... while this is not a mere warning fix. What am I expected 
to do to get it accepted -- recast it against 2.6.19-rt1?

>  kernel/latency_trace.c |   42 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>  1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

WBR, Sergei
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/