[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1906171409250.1854@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 14:14:57 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: 维康石 <swkhack@...il.com>
cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>, sboyd@...nel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, swkhack@...com,
Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] time: fix a assignment error in ntp module
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, 维康石 wrote:
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
> Yes,the >UINT_MAX value can be passed by
> syscall adjtimex->do_adjtimex->__do_adjtimex->process_adjtimex_modes by the
> proper arugments.
So there is clearly some sanity check missing, but surely not that
type cast.
> > > - if (txc->modes & ADJ_TAI && txc->constant > 0)
> > > + if (txc->modes & ADJ_TAI && (int)txc->constant > 0)
> > > *time_tai = txc->constant;
> >
> > The way more interesting question is whether txc->constant can be >
> > UINT_MAX. In that case the txc->constant would be truncated.
> >
> > Miroslav?
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists