linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/9] rtc/test: Update driver to address y2038/y2106 issues

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 16 Jan 2015 23:40:26 +0800
From:	Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@...aro.org>
To:	Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>
Cc:	Xunlei Pang <xlpang@....com>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>,
	"rtc-linux@...glegroups.com" <rtc-linux@...glegroups.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/9] rtc/test: Update driver to address y2038/y2106 issues

On 14 January 2015 at 23:39, Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 23:26:37 +0800
> Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@...aro.org> wrote:
>
>> But on the other hand, we will have no test for  set_mmss64(),
>> because adding the set_mmss64() will make set_mmss() dysfunctional.
>
>  add a module parameter

Hi Alessandro,

Thanks for your advice, how about the following one?

---
 drivers/rtc/rtc-test.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-test.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-test.c
index 8f86fa9..3a2da4c 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-test.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-test.c
@@ -13,6 +13,10 @@
 #include <linux/rtc.h>
 #include <linux/platform_device.h>

+static int test_mmss64;
+module_param(test_mmss64, int, 0644);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(test_mmss64, "Test struct rtc_class_ops.set_mmss64().");
+
 static struct platform_device *test0 = NULL, *test1 = NULL;

 static int test_rtc_read_alarm(struct device *dev,
@@ -30,7 +34,13 @@ static int test_rtc_set_alarm(struct device *dev,
 static int test_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev,
  struct rtc_time *tm)
 {
- rtc_time_to_tm(get_seconds(), tm);
+ rtc_time64_to_tm(ktime_get_real_seconds(), tm);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int test_rtc_set_mmss64(struct device *dev, time64_t secs)
+{
+ dev_info(dev, "%s, secs = %lld\n", __func__, (long long)secs);
  return 0;
 }

@@ -55,7 +65,7 @@ static int test_rtc_alarm_irq_enable(struct device
*dev, unsigned int enable)
  return 0;
 }

-static const struct rtc_class_ops test_rtc_ops = {
+static struct rtc_class_ops test_rtc_ops = {
  .proc = test_rtc_proc,
  .read_time = test_rtc_read_time,
  .read_alarm = test_rtc_read_alarm,
@@ -101,6 +111,11 @@ static int test_probe(struct platform_device *plat_dev)
  int err;
  struct rtc_device *rtc;

+ if (test_mmss64) {
+ test_rtc_ops.set_mmss64 = test_rtc_set_mmss64;
+ test_rtc_ops.set_mmss = NULL;
+ }
+
  rtc = devm_rtc_device_register(&plat_dev->dev, "test",
  &test_rtc_ops, THIS_MODULE);
  if (IS_ERR(rtc)) {
--
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/