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 06:43:20 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
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

On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:03:41AM +0200, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> 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.

Excellent idea. I'll make that change.

Thanks,
Guenter

> 
> >  	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