[COMMITTED] Re: bug in times.c

[Petr Baudis <pasky at ucw dot cz>]

  Hi!

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 01:11:57PM +0100, Holger Brunck wrote:
> On 03/11/2013 01:05 PM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> > On 11 March 2013 16:53, Petr Baudis <pasky@ucw.cz> wrote:
> >> -      /* If we come here the memory is valid and the kernel did not
> >> +      /* If we come here the memory is valid (or BUF is NULL, which is
> >> +       * a valid condition for the kernel syscall) and the kernel did not
> >>          return an EFAULT error.  Return the value given by the kernel.  */
> > 
> > Please also fix the comment above it which says:
> > 
> >   "We crash applications which pass in an invalid BUF pointer."
> > 
> > to:
> > 
> >   "We crash applications which pass in an invalid non-NULL BUF
> > pointer.  Linux allows BUF to be NULL."
> > 
> > The touch() is deliberate to ensure that we don't mistake an EFAULT
> > for a valid return value.  However, the kernel will never send us an
> > EFAULT if buffer is NULL, so it is safe to bypass it.  The change
> > looks OK to me with the above modification to the comment.
> > 
> 
> do you send a patch for this or should I? Makes no difference for me, just let
> me know.

  I'm sorry for the delay, I have committed this now as a fairly
obvious change. 58a1335e76a553e1cf4edeebc27f16fc9b53d6e6

				Petr "Pasky" Baudis