linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/51] rtc: da9063: stop using rtc deprecated functions

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: <CA+M3ks5cr3PEKnr3sT9KaA2VkqkrnAhoN7XfOr8vJX2T1CRGQw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:18:06 +0200
From:   Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>
To:     Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
Cc:     "linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
        Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>,
        Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
        "rtc-linux@...glegroups.com" <rtc-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/51] rtc: da9063: stop using rtc deprecated functions

2017-06-20 15:41 GMT+02:00 Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>:
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> On 20 June 2017 10:35, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
>
>> Subject: [PATCH 14/51] rtc: da9063: stop using rtc deprecated functions
>
> Probably this subject should be "rtc: da9052" not 63.

yes you are right this patch is for da9052

>
>> rtc_time_to_tm() and rtc_tm_to_time() are deprecated because they
>> rely on 32bits variables and that will make rtc break in y2038/2016.
>> Stop using those two functions to safer 64bits ones.
>>
> [...]
>
>> ---
>>  drivers/rtc/rtc-da9052.c | 8 +++-----
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-da9052.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-da9052.c
>> index 4273377..99a0489 100644
>> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-da9052.c
>> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-da9052.c
>> @@ -104,17 +104,15 @@ static int da9052_read_alarm(struct da9052_rtc
>> *rtc, struct rtc_time *rtc_tm)
>>  static int da9052_set_alarm(struct da9052_rtc *rtc, struct rtc_time *rtc_tm)
>>  {
>>       struct da9052 *da9052 = rtc->da9052;
>> -     unsigned long alm_time;
>> +     unsigned long long alm_time;
>>       int ret;
>>       uint8_t v[3];
>>
>> -     ret = rtc_tm_to_time(rtc_tm, &alm_time);
>> -     if (ret != 0)
>> -             return ret;
>> +     alm_time = rtc_tm_to_time64(rtc_tm);
>
> But they kind of use the same functions anyway.
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/rtc.h?h=v4.12-rc6#n35
> And I think they they are abstracted on purpose.
>
> The DA9052/53 hardware can only handle alarms up to the end of 2063.

That is the hardware limits but I don't know if we should align
framework functions to
for each driver limitation or use 64 bits functions everywhere.
but this discussion is on going on another thread...
>
> Regards,
> Steve
>