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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 2014 11:10:39 +0900
From:	Hyogi Gim <>
To:	Andrew Morton <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/rtc/interface.c: check the validation of
 rtc_time in __rtc_read_time

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 03:21:31PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:05:29 +0900 Hyogi Gim <> wrote:
> > Some of rtc devices always return '0' when rtc_class_ops.read_time is called.
> > So if rtc_time isn't verified in callback, rtc interface cannot know whether
> > rtc_time is valid.
> We should fix the buggy .read_time() implementations...

Thanks for comments.
I'm studying rtc framework and trying to find a problem.
This is a minor bug. But, as you know, it can be a big problem for
newbies like me.

Even though it was late, I send you reply because a question.
If this patch is merged, rtc_valid_tm() in rtc_class_ops.read_time
callback is not necessary anymore.
So, I think each rtc device driver should change the code.
I can change the code. But, test is a little different.

In this case, how can I progress this modification?
Can I just send the notification for rtc_valid_tm() to the driver
manufacturer? or, request test for the code that I've modified?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists