Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Mar 2006 12:31:02 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [patch 1/2] Validate itimer timeval from userspace |
| |
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: > > On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 12:07 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > From my reading, 2.4's sys_setitimer() will normalise the incoming timeval > > rather than rejecting it. And I think 2.6.13 did that too. > > > > It would be bad of us to change this behaviour, even if that's what the > > spec says we should do - because we can break existing applications. > > > > So I think we're stuck with it - we should normalise and then accept such > > timevals. And we should have a big comment explaining how we differ from > > the spec, and why. > > Hmm. How do you treat a negative value ? >
In the same way as earlier kernels did!
Unless, of course, those kernels did something utterly insane. In that case we'd need to have a little think.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |