linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/7] rtc: rzn1: Report maximum alarm limit to rtc core

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]

Date:   Thu, 17 Aug 2023 10:03:41 +0200
From:   Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] rtc: rzn1: Report maximum alarm limit to rtc core

Hi Guenter,

linux@...ck-us.net wrote on Wed, 16 Aug 2023 06:39:36 -0700:

> RZN1 only supports alarms up to one week in the future.
> Report the limit to the RTC core.
> 
> Cc: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> ---
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-rzn1.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rzn1.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rzn1.c
> index dca736caba85..c2cc3774ebb8 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rzn1.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rzn1.c
> @@ -351,6 +351,7 @@ static int rzn1_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	rtc->rtcdev->range_min = RTC_TIMESTAMP_BEGIN_2000;
>  	rtc->rtcdev->range_max = RTC_TIMESTAMP_END_2099;
> +	rtc->rtcdev->range_max_offset = 7 * 86400;

When we set the alarm, we use:

	farest = rtc_tm_to_time64(&tm_now) + (7 * 86400);

What about using range_max_offset (whatever its final name) in this
calculation as it will be now set in probe? It would further clarify
its purpose.

>  	rtc->rtcdev->ops = &rzn1_rtc_ops;
>  	set_bit(RTC_FEATURE_ALARM_RES_MINUTE, rtc->rtcdev->features);
>  	clear_bit(RTC_FEATURE_UPDATE_INTERRUPT, rtc->rtcdev->features);

With the above change,

Reviewed-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>

Thanks,
Miquèl