From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264519AbUFYAVI (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jun 2004 20:21:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265961AbUFYAVI (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jun 2004 20:21:08 -0400 Received: from levante.wiggy.net ([195.85.225.139]:41696 "EHLO mx1.wiggy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264519AbUFYAU7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jun 2004 20:20:59 -0400 Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 02:20:57 +0200 From: Wichert Akkerman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: sys_gettimeofday racy or not? Message-ID: <20040625002057.GA3052@wiggy.net> Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This just happened to catch my eye and it's probably perfectly valid, but if so please educate me on why it is. In kernel/time.c sys_gettimeofday() there is this code: if (unlikely(tz != NULL)) { if (copy_to_user(tz, &sys_tz, sizeof(sys_tz))) return -EFAULT; } what prevents sys_tz from being changed while this code runs? Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.