Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

Quoting Kees Cook (keesc...@chromium.org): > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:54 AM, John Stultz wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Baolin Wang wrote: > >> security_settime() uses a timespec, which is not year 2038 safe > >> on 32bit systems.

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

Quoting Kees Cook (keesc...@chromium.org): > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:54 AM, John Stultz wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Baolin Wang wrote: > >> security_settime() uses a timespec, which is not year 2038 safe > >> on 32bit systems. Thus this patch introduces the security_settime64()

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On 19 April 2016 at 00:54, John Stultz wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Baolin Wang wrote: >> security_settime() uses a timespec, which is not year 2038 safe >> on 32bit systems. Thus this patch introduces the security_settime64() >>

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On 19 April 2016 at 00:54, John Stultz wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Baolin Wang wrote: >> security_settime() uses a timespec, which is not year 2038 safe >> on 32bit systems. Thus this patch introduces the security_settime64() >> function with timespec64 type. We also convert the

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On 19 April 2016 at 00:31, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 06:01:33PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> I seem to have only received patches 3 and 4, both on my personal >> address and on lkml. Any idea what happened? > >> Unless you did not mean to send these

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On 19 April 2016 at 00:31, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 06:01:33PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> I seem to have only received patches 3 and 4, both on my personal >> address and on lkml. Any idea what happened? > >> Unless you did not mean to send these patches at all, could you

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:54 AM, John Stultz wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Baolin Wang wrote: >> security_settime() uses a timespec, which is not year 2038 safe >> on 32bit systems. Thus this patch introduces the security_settime64() >>

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:54 AM, John Stultz wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Baolin Wang wrote: >> security_settime() uses a timespec, which is not year 2038 safe >> on 32bit systems. Thus this patch introduces the security_settime64() >> function with timespec64 type. We also convert

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Baolin Wang wrote: > security_settime() uses a timespec, which is not year 2038 safe > on 32bit systems. Thus this patch introduces the security_settime64() > function with timespec64 type. We also convert the cap_settime() helper >

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Baolin Wang wrote: > security_settime() uses a timespec, which is not year 2038 safe > on 32bit systems. Thus this patch introduces the security_settime64() > function with timespec64 type. We also convert the cap_settime() helper > function to use the 64bit

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 06:01:33PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > I seem to have only received patches 3 and 4, both on my personal > address and on lkml. Any idea what happened? > Unless you did not mean to send these patches at all, could you resend > the entire series and put me and the y2038

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 06:01:33PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > I seem to have only received patches 3 and 4, both on my personal > address and on lkml. Any idea what happened? > Unless you did not mean to send these patches at all, could you resend > the entire series and put me and the y2038

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On Friday 08 April 2016 14:02:11 Baolin Wang wrote: > security_settime() uses a timespec, which is not year 2038 safe > on 32bit systems. Thus this patch introduces the security_settime64() > function with timespec64 type. We also convert the cap_settime() helper > function to use the 64bit types.

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 3/5] security: Introduce security_settime64()

On Friday 08 April 2016 14:02:11 Baolin Wang wrote: > security_settime() uses a timespec, which is not year 2038 safe > on 32bit systems. Thus this patch introduces the security_settime64() > function with timespec64 type. We also convert the cap_settime() helper > function to use the 64bit types.