[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1709281910430.6300@namei.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 19:11:27 +1000 (AEST)
From: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>
cc: dhowells@...hat.com, james.l.morris@...cle.com, serge@...lyn.com,
arnd@...db.de, broonie@...nel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Fix y2038 issues for security/keys subsystem
On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Baolin Wang wrote:
> Since 'time_t', 'timeval' and 'timespec' types are not year 2038 safe on
> 32 bits system, this patchset tries to fix this issues for security/keys
> subsystem.
>
> Changes since v1:
> - Add reviewed tag from Arnd.
> - Drop Patch 3 which had been merged into kernel 4.14 by David.
>
> Baolin Wang (2):
> security: keys: Replace time_t/timespec with time64_t
> security: keys: Replace time_t with time64_t for struct
> key_preparsed_payload
>
> include/linux/key-type.h | 2 +-
> include/linux/key.h | 7 ++++---
> security/keys/gc.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
> security/keys/internal.h | 8 ++++----
> security/keys/key.c | 27 ++++++++++-----------------
> security/keys/keyring.c | 18 +++++++++---------
> security/keys/permission.c | 3 +--
> security/keys/proc.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
> security/keys/process_keys.c | 2 +-
> 9 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
David, have you taken these into your tree? I can apply them to mine if
needed.
--
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists