On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:01:30PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > I had suggested a more complete helper function at some point, > to take care of all combinations of checking/non-checking, 32/64 > bit, microsecond/nanosecond, and zeroing/checking the upper 32 bits > of nanoseconds before comparing against 1 billion, but Deepa > thought that was overkill, so I didn't continue that. Yeah, that sounds like a nightmare to use ;-) > For all I can tell, the get_timespec64() helper should almost always > include the check, the one exception I know is utimensat() and related > functions that may encode the special UTIME_NOW and UTIME_OMIT > constants in the nanoseconds. So do you endorse the get_valid_timespec64() patch I posted up-thread? We can't just make get_timespec64 return an errno directly because it'll require changing all the users.
