From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, y2038@lists.linaro.org,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, tglx@linutronix.de, arnd@arndb.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: Add support to check max and min inode times
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 09:19:05 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160302221905.GO29057@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1456933894-17001-1-git-send-email-deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 07:51:34AM -0800, Deepa Dinamani wrote:
> MAX_INVALID_VFS_TIME and MIN_INVALID_VFS_TIME are initialized to S64_MIN
> and S64_MAX respectively so that even if one of the fields is
> uninitialized, it can be detected by using the condition
> max_time < min_time.
I can't work out what MIN/MAX_INVALID_VFS_TIME is supposed to mean
when I see it in the code. does it mean time that lies between
MIN_INVALID_VFS_TIME > time > MAX_INVALID_VFS_TIME is invalid
(unlikely, but that's the obvious reading :)?
Or that time < MIN_INVALID_VFS_TIME is invalid? Or is it valid? I
can't tell...
Normally limits are specified by "min valid" and "max valid"
defines, which are pretty clear in their meaning. Like:
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -927,6 +927,12 @@ static inline struct file *get_file(struct file *f)
> #define MAX_LFS_FILESIZE ((loff_t)0x7fffffffffffffffLL)
> #endif
>
> +#define MAX_VFS_TIME S64_MAX
> +#define MIN_VFS_TIME S64_MIN
These. Anything ouside these ranges is invalid.
As such, I think this is wrong for 32 bit systems as the min/max VFS
times right now are S32_MAX/S32_MIN...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-02 22:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-02 15:51 [PATCH] vfs: Add support to check max and min inode times Deepa Dinamani
2016-03-02 16:26 ` [Y2038] " Arnd Bergmann
2016-03-02 22:19 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2016-03-02 23:07 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-03-02 23:45 ` Dave Chinner
2016-03-03 6:24 ` Deepa Dinamani
2016-03-03 14:08 ` [Y2038] " Arnd Bergmann
2016-03-04 1:10 ` Dave Chinner
2016-03-04 7:49 ` Deepa Dinamani
2016-03-04 16:54 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-03-04 6:31 ` Steve French
2016-03-04 16:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160302221905.GO29057@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=deepa.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=y2038@lists.linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).