linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 6/8] media: v4l2-core: fix v4l2

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 14 Dec 2019 22:44:27 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>
Cc:     Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        y2038 Mailman List <y2038@...ts.linaro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        me@...io
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/8] media: v4l2-core: fix v4l2_buffer handling for
 time64 ABI

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 12:27 PM Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl> wrote:
>
> On 12/13/19 4:32 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> >>> I am unable to test with musl since v4l2-ctl and v4l2-compliance are C++ programs,
> >>> and there doesn't appear to be an easy way to compile a C++ program with musl.
> >>>
> >>> If you happen to have a test environment where you can compile C++ with musl,
> >>> then let me know and I can give instructions on how to run the compliance tests.
> >>>
> >>> If you can't test that, then I can merge this regardless, and hope for the best
> >>> once the Y2038 fixes end up in glibc. But ideally I'd like to have this tested.
> >>
> >> I've heard good things about the prebuilt toolchains from http://musl.cc/.
> >> These seems to come with a libstdc++, but I have not tried that myself.
> >
> > I'll see if I can give those a spin, but if I can't get it to work quickly,
> > then I don't plan on spending much time on it.
>
> I managed to build v4l2-ctl/compliance with those toolchains, but they seem to be
> still using a 32-bit time_t.
>
> Do I need to get a specific version or do something special?

My mistake: only musl-1.2.0 and up have 64-bit time_t, but this isn't released
yet. According to https://wiki.musl-libc.org/roadmap.html, the release
was planned
for last month, no idea how long it will take.

It appears that a snapshot build at
http://more.musl.cc/7.5.0/x86_64-linux-musl/i686-linux-musl-native.tgz
is new enough to have 64-bit time_t (according to include/bits/alltypes.h),
but this is a month old as well, so it may have known bugs.

Adding Zach to Cc here, maybe he already has plans for another build with
the latest version.

       Arnd