linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] signal: sys_rt_sigtimedwait: simplify the timeout logic

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: <BANLkTi=JMZROehocU6dY=YBpAB69nmCrbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 25 Apr 2011 12:38:04 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Nikita V. Youshchenko" <nyoushchenko@...sta.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] signal: sys_rt_sigtimedwait: simplify the timeout logic

On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Assuming that timespec_to_jiffies() always returns nonzero if ts is
> "not zero timeout". I think it does.

You really need to double-check that it does. We've not always done
that right, and while I think "round up" is the right thing to do
there, it had better be verified and then a comment added to make sure
it doesn't change.

But yes, with verification and comment, your "if (timeout)  ..
timeout+1" would work fine.

                  Linus
--
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/