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]
Message-ID: <CAMz4kuKcLif02j6VwfAgQ1=4orhydboj9yXgvau=KQofkuosLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Mar 2018 10:47:22 +0800
From:   Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>
To:     Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 1/3] rtc: Use time64_t to save range_max of RTC

Hi Alexandre,

On 8 March 2018 at 06:54, Alexandre Belloni
<alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 26/02/2018 at 16:33:56 +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
>> We need use rtc->range_max to valid if the time values are valid,
>> and the time values are saved by time64_t type. So change the
>> rtc->range_max to time64_t type for comparison correctly.
>>
>
> I'm not applying this one because the described issue will never happen
> as negative times are forbidden by the rtc subsystem.

OK.

>
> I've applied the two following patches
>

Thanks.


-- 
Baolin.wang
Best Regards

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ