On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 04:22:24PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 27 November 2015 16:42:54 Aya Mahfouz wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 04:35:58PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Wednesday 18 November 2015 17:33:38 Aya Mahfouz wrote: > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Changelog: > > > > > > v1: The changes were originally made by Arnd Bergmann in > > > > > > relation to time_t. I've broken down a patch sent to me > > > > > > into two independent patches. > > > > > > > > > > I suppose you have tried and failed to split it up into smaller > > > > > chunks? > > > > I'm playing it safe since there are uses of key->expiry that are > > > > dependent on key_preparsed_payload->expiry. If you would like for me > > > > to break it down further, I can try. > > > > > > > > > > I think that would be helpful. The current version is a little too big > > > to review properly in one chunk. > > > > > I've tried several time to break it up into 2 or 3 patches without > > ignoring dependencies but I fail every time to come with a set of > > independent patches. Can I keep it as is? I'm open to any division > > suggestions. > > My first idea would be to split the key_preparsed_payload changes from > the struct key changes. Have you tried that? What problems did you run into? > Yes, the problem is that the assignments to key->expiry come from key_preparsed_payload-> expiry. I tried the following division:
patch 1 include/linux/key.h security/keys/keyring.c security/keys/permission.c security/keys/process_keys.c security/keys/gc.c security/keys/internal.h patch 2 include/linux/key-type.h security/keys/key.c But key.c manipulates structures of type key and key_preparsed_payload. > Arnd -- Kind Regards, Aya Saif El-yazal Mahfouz _______________________________________________ Y2038 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/y2038
