On Sun, 2 Apr 2017, Chagin Dmitry wrote:
On Sun, Apr 02, 2017 at 04:36:51PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Sun, Apr 02, 2017 at 07:46:13AM +0000, Dmitry Chagin wrote:
Author: dchagin
Date: Sun Apr 2 07:46:13 2017
New Revision: 316393
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/316393
Log:
As noted by bde@ negative tv_sec values are not checked for overflow,
so overflow can still occur. Fix that. Also remove the extra check for
tv_sec size as under COMPAT_LINUX32 it is always true.
Pointed out by: bde@
MFC after: 1 week
Modified:
head/sys/compat/linux/linux_time.c
Modified: head/sys/compat/linux/linux_time.c
==============================================================================
--- head/sys/compat/linux/linux_time.c Sun Apr 2 07:11:15 2017
(r316392)
+++ head/sys/compat/linux/linux_time.c Sun Apr 2 07:46:13 2017
(r316393)
@@ -125,8 +125,7 @@ native_to_linux_timespec(struct l_timesp
LIN_SDT_PROBE2(time, native_to_linux_timespec, entry, ltp, ntp);
#ifdef COMPAT_LINUX32
- if (ntp->tv_sec > INT_MAX &&
- sizeof(ltp->tv_sec) != sizeof(ntp->tv_sec))
+ if (ntp->tv_sec > INT_MAX || ntp->tv_sec < INT_MIN)
This line reads as only tv_sec == INT_MAX case results in non-EOVERFLOW
condition.
should I rewrite it like:
if (ntp->tv_sec < INT_MIN || ntp->tv_sec > INT_MAX)
?
I don't see the problem. Do you mean that the compiler might remove
this code because the check is tautologically false on 32-bit natives,
but warn too?
The sizeof() comparison is even easier to evaluate at compile time.
Perhaps it acted a hint to the compiler to not warn.
Bruce
_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
