linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] spufs: use timespec64 for timestamps

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: <1dc0e4ce-2190-eb83-166f-b8ba7cdacede@ozlabs.org>
Date:   Tue, 16 Jan 2018 13:07:24 -0600
From:   Jeremy Kerr <jk@...abs.org>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] spufs: use timespec64 for timestamps

Hi Arnd,

> The switch log prints the tv_sec portion of timespec as a 32-bit
> number, while overflows in 2106. It also uses the timespec type,
> which is safe on 64-bit architectures, but deprecated because
> it causes overflows in 2038 elsewhere.
> 
> This changes it to timespec64 and printing a 64-bit number for
> consistency.

If we still have spufs in the tree in 2038 I'd be worried :) But good
to keep things consistent.

Acked-by: Jeremy Kerr <jk@...abs.org>

Michael: want to take this directly through your tree?

Cheers,


Jeremy