linux-kernel - Re: Query: Y2038 patch series for 3.18 Kernel

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOuPNLh5O0YuRi6=oOSCbaH0zy-kkKUcD__G0Ncw5yAFtko7=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2025 15:17:58 +0530
From: Pintu Kumar Agarwal <pintu.ping@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Siddh Raman Pant <sanganaka@...dh.me>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	kernelnewbies <kernelnewbies@...nelnewbies.org>
Subject: Re:  Query: Y2038 patch series for 3.18 Kernel

On Tue, 4 Nov 2025 at 15:18, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2025, at 06:02, Pintu Kumar Agarwal wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 at 10:35, Siddh Raman Pant <sanganaka@...dh.me> wrote:
> >>
> >> Mon, 03 Nov 2025 09:57:18 +0530 को Pintu Kumar Agarwal ने लिखा :
> >> > We have an arm32 based embedded product which is based on the 3.18
> >> > kernel and a simple busybox.
> >> > We wanted to support the Y2038 issue on this older kernel.
> >> > Is this feasible
> >> > Do we have the Y2038 separate patches available for both kernel and userspace
> >> > ?
> >> > Or upgrading the kernel is the only option ?
> >>
> >> Upgrading is a much much better option.
> >>
> > Yes, I understand, but upgrading the kernel on this older SoC brings
> > more complexities, challenges and time taking.
> > Customers also do not agree for the upgrade at this stage and they are
> > looking for alternatives.
> > So, we are exploring both the options right now.
> >
> > Are there any patchset maintained separately for this Y2038 issue for
> > each kernel version to have a look ?
>
> I used to maintain a 5.4 kernel with backports from the 5.6 patches,
> but I would not recommend using that. Anything earlier than 5.4
> is completely hopeless for 2038 because one would have to essentially
> redo the changes from scratch.
>
OK thanks.

> Which chip exactly are you using?
This request is for one of the legacy QC MDM 9K chipset.