Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 06:39:47 +0100 From: Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.org> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: brian@awfulhak.org, ache@nagual.pp.ru, brian@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, CVS-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-usrsbin@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/ppp timer.c Message-ID: <199705100539.GAA13589@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:28 %2B1000." <199705100524.PAA06538@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> Actually it is, read the kernel source :-). The kernel checks the interval
> >> even when it doesn't use it and fails without doing anything if the interval
> >> is garbage (tv_sec < 0 || tv_sec > 10^8 || tv_usec < 0 || tv_usec >= 10^6).
> >
> >Should I fix kern/kern_time.c then ?
>
> No, it's not incorrect. It does almost exactly what the ERRORS section in
> the man page says: it returns EINVAL if "_a_ value parameter specified a
> time that was too large to be handled". The man page is just sloppy in
> not mentioning that it returns EINVAL if a value parameter was invalid.
Ouch. Too late. Should I roll it back out ? (I'll wait for a
bit longer before sticking my feet in this time).
> Bruce
--
Brian <brian@awfulhak.org>, <brian@freebsd.org>
<http://www.awfulhak.org>;
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705100539.GAA13589>