[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEHp+GYRhf0oFE1OiRJnwNCEkGdMcaYe3HAntnq+VUgwWp3g9w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 19:16:55 -0700
From: Dima Stepanov <dstepanov.src@...il.com>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] time: Fix problematic change in settimeofday
error checking
> @@ -21,6 +21,9 @@ static inline int do_sys_settimeofday(const struct timespec *tv,
> struct timespec64 ts64;
>
> if (!tv)
> + return do_sys_settimeofday64(NULL, tz);
> +
> + if (tv && !timespec_valid(tv))
> return -EINVAL;
Looks like an extra check for (tv), maybe it will be better to use:
+ if (!timespec_valid(tv))
Regards, Dima.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists