From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Cc: Tina Ruchandani <ruchandani.tina@gmail.com>, y2038@lists.linaro.org,
        linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firewire: nosy: Replace timeval with timespec64
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 22:36 +0100
Message-ID: <3575481.G5vcZLmfxK@wuerfel>
User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.16.0-10-generic; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <20160321211917.198f4f03@kant>
References: <20160321055911.GA98166@localhost> <3432361.tg4OvfJSmN@wuerfel> <20160321211917.198f4f03@kant>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1401
Lines: 32

On Monday 21 March 2016 21:19:17 Stefan Richter wrote:
> On Mar 21 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Sunday 20 March 2016 22:59:11 Tina Ruchandani wrote:
> > > 'struct timeval' uses a 32 bit field for its 'seconds' value which
> > > will overflow in year 2038 and beyond. This patch replaces the use
> > > of timeval in nosy.c with timespec64 which doesn't suffer from y2038
> > > issue. The code is correct as is - since it is only using the
> > > microseconds portion of timeval. However, this patch does the
> > > replacement as part of a larger effort to remove all instances of
> > > 'struct timeval' from the kernel (that would help identify cases
> > > where the code is actually broken).
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Tina Ruchandani <ruchandani.tina@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/firewire/nosy.c | 8 +++++---
> > >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)  
> > 
> > The patch looks correct to me, but it seems the same one has
> > just been merged into mainline Linux on Saturday (the patch
> > was posted back in October).
> > 
> > commit 2ae4b6b20e2004dccf80d804ae52b073377c2f5b
> [...]
> 
> No, Amitoj's patch from October changed nosy.c::packet_irq_hander, whereas
> Tina' patch changes nosy.c::bus_reset_irq_handler.  IOW the new patch
> completes what the former patch (and us reviewers) missed.
> 

Ah, I see. Sorry for my confusion.

Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>