[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <164677445867.88674.16740426287923298243.b4-ty@bootlin.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2022 22:21:05 +0100
From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
To: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>,
Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev,
Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>,
Ondrej Jirman <megous@...ous.com>,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>
Subject: Re: (subset) [PATCH v10 03/18] rtc: sun6i: Fix time overflow handling
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 12:26:28 +0000, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Using "unsigned long" for UNIX timestamps is never a good idea, and
> comparing the value of such a variable against U32_MAX does not do
> anything useful on 32-bit systems.
>
> Use the proper time64_t type when dealing with timestamps, and avoid
> cutting down the time range unnecessarily. This also fixes the flawed
> check for the alarm time being too far into the future.
>
> [...]
Applied, thanks!
[03/18] rtc: sun6i: Fix time overflow handling
commit: 25c9815569cefd4f719c6c1266fe897e57642278
Best regards,
--
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists