lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-03-18 21:36    [W:0.079 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site