[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1erR4ToZTH09p_KcNo5cNbOuUpmZG9ststD=gf6zfwsw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:44:13 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, james.l.morris@...cle.com,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, marc.dionne@...istor.com,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fix y2038 issues for security/keys subsystem
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 4:51 AM, Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org> wrote:
> Since 'time_t', 'timeval' and 'timespec' types are not year 2038 safe on
> 32 bits system, this patchset tries to fix this issues for security/keys
> subsystem and net/rxrpc subsystem which is connected with security/keys
> subsystem.
>
> Baolin Wang (3):
> security: keys: Replace time_t/timespec with time64_t
> security: keys: Replace time_t with time64_t for struct
> key_preparsed_payload
> net: rxrpc: Replace time_t type with time64_t type
Hi David,
I did a private review before Baolin posted these patches, this version look
correct to me, though I would like to see some clarification from you for the
rxrpc portion, I'll reply there separately.
All three patches
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists