linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rtc: cros-ec: Limit RTC alarm range if needed

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: <20221031224744.GA2082109@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Mon, 31 Oct 2022 15:47:44 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>,
        Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
        chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: cros-ec: Limit RTC alarm range if needed

On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 10:55:21PM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> 
> The issue with the current patch is that it forbids going for a better
> solution because you will then take for granted that this driver can't
> ever fail.
> 

This is incorrect. My plan was to get this accepted first and then work
with those responsible on a cleaner solution (which is much more vague).
We can not wait for that cleaner solution now. There is nothing that
prevents us from taking our time to find a cleaner solution, and then
to change the code again to use it.

Guenter