linux-kernel - Re: [patch 14/45] posix-timers: Consolidate interval retrieval

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: <ZJww66Svi84Bvw9Z@localhost.localdomain>
Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2023 15:08:59 +0200
From:   Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
        John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 14/45] posix-timers: Consolidate interval retrieval

Le Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 04:37:40PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner a écrit :
> There is no point to collect the current interval in the posix clock
> specific settime() and gettime() callbacks. Just do it right in the common
> code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>

The only difference I see is that we now return the old interval
even if the target is reaped, which probably doesn't matter anyway.

Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>