netdev - Re: [Y2038] [RESEND PATCH 2/3] fs: poll/select/recvmmsg: use timespec64 for timeout events

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

Message-Id: <20160504165115.e0247881921fdcd0af4a394c@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 4 May 2016 16:51:15 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	y2038@...ts.linaro.org, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [Y2038] [RESEND PATCH 2/3] fs: poll/select/recvmmsg: use
 timespec64 for timeout events

On Wed, 04 May 2016 23:08:11 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:

> > But I'm less comfortable making the call on this one. It looks
> > relatively straight forward, but it would be good to have maintainer
> > acks before I add it to my tree.
> 
> Agreed. Feel free to add my
> 
> Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> 
> at least (whoever picks it up).

In reply to [1/3] John said

: Looks ok at the first glance. I've queued these up for testing,
: however I only got #1 and #3 of the set. Are you hoping these two
: patches will go through tip/timers/core or are you looking for acks so
: they can go via another tree?

However none of the patches are in linux-next.

John had qualms about [2/3], but it looks like a straightforward
substitution in areas which will get plenty of testing

I'll grab the patches for now to get them some external testing.