linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] lutimesat: actual syscall and wire-up on i386

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: <45BC57FB.4010209@zytor.com>
Date:	Sat, 27 Jan 2007 23:59:55 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...nvz.org>
CC:	akpm@...l.org, devel@...nvz.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] lutimesat: actual syscall and wire-up on i386

Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> +asmlinkage long sys_lutimesat(int dfd, char __user *filename, struct timeval __user *utimes)

Could we get these to take struct timespec instead of struct timeval?

Right now we have a real problem in that the interfaces that *set* times 
take struct timeval (microsecond granularity) but the interfaces that 
*get* times return struct timespec (nanosecond granularity), which means 
information loss on any setting operations.

	-hpa

-
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/