On Wed, 2022-01-05 at 15:58 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 05.01.22 15:56, Bezdeka, Florian (T CED SES-DE) wrote: > > On Wed, 2022-01-05 at 15:43 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > On 05.01.22 15:06, Florian Bezdeka wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > this is the last missing POSIX related y2038 affected syscall in > > > > Xenomai. With this applied we have two Xenomai specific syscalls > > > > missing: > > > > > > > > - sc_cobalt_thread_setschedparam_ex > > > > - sc_cobalt_thread_getschedparam_ex > > > > > > > > While adding tests for the introduced cond_wait_prologue64 I hit a > > > > kernel OOPS due to insuficient validation of user provided pointers. > > > > That has been addressed as well. > > > > > > Thanks for both! Is it possibly to move the fixes the front? That would > > > also ensure that I can easily pick them into stable. > > > > Yes. Patch 4 and 7 could be moved to the front easily. Do you want me > > to split patch 2 into the y2038 and non y2038 part, or does that not > > qualify for stable at all? > > Can I reorder things myself, or does patch 4 break (patch 7 does not, > already checked)? Then I just change the application order while doing > git am.
No breakage expected. The only "problematic" one would be patch 2 as it touches y2038 as well as non-y2038 syscall definitions. Let me know if I should split that into two parts (which would allow the non y2038 related cleanup to be applied to stable separately) > > Jan >
