[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87v7yz96gr.ffs@tglx>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 12:46:28 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>, Richard Cochran
<richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc: bryan.whitehead@...rochip.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, anna-maria@...utronix.de,
frederic@...nel.org, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, mbenes@...e.cz,
jstultz@...gle.com, andrew@...n.ch, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v3 1/2] posix-timers: Check timespec64 before call
clock_set()
On Thu, Sep 12 2024 at 20:24, Jinjie Ruan wrote:
> On 2024/9/12 20:04, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> How does this code validate timespecs for clock_settime(clockid) where
>> clockid != CLOCK_REALTIME?
>
> According to the man manual of clock_settime(), the other clockids are
> not settable.
>
> And in Linux kernel code, except for CLOCK_REALTIME which is defined in
> posix_clocks array, the clock_set() hooks are not defined and will
> return -EINVAL in SYSCALL_DEFINE2(clock_settime), so the check is not
> necessary.
You clearly understand the code you are modifying:
const struct k_clock clock_posix_dynamic = {
.clock_getres = pc_clock_getres,
.clock_set = pc_clock_settime,
which is what PTP clocks use and that's what this is about, no?
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists