New_alarm is unsigned so the test didn't work.
    
Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <12o3l@tiscali.nl>
---
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ds1374.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ds1374.c
index 45bda18..119bdc9 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ds1374.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ds1374.c
@@ -216,16 +216,16 @@ static int ds1374_set_alarm(struct device *dev, struct rtc_wkalrm *alarm)
 	rtc_tm_to_time(&alarm->time, &new_alarm);
 	rtc_tm_to_time(&now, &itime);
 
-	new_alarm -= itime;
-
 	/* This can happen due to races, in addition to dates that are
 	 * truly in the past.  To avoid requiring the caller to check for
 	 * races, dates in the past are assumed to be in the recent past
 	 * (i.e. not something that we'd rather the caller know about via
 	 * an error), and the alarm is set to go off as soon as possible.
 	 */
-	if (new_alarm <= 0)
+	if (new_alarm <= itime)
 		new_alarm = 1;
+	else
+		new_alarm -= itime;
 
 	mutex_lock(&ds1374->mutex);
 

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/