I'm not sure that the pytime.c change in commit a853a8ba7850381d49b284295dd6f0dc491dbe44 is correct:

diff --git a/Python/pytime.c b/Python/pytime.c
index 8979adc219..f3c913226c 100644
--- a/Python/pytime.c
+++ b/Python/pytime.c
@@ -276,7 +278,6 @@ static int
 _PyTime_FromFloatObject(_PyTime_t *t, double value, _PyTime_round_t round,
                         long unit_to_ns)
 {
-    double err;
     /* volatile avoids optimization changing how numbers are rounded */
     volatile double d;
 
@@ -285,12 +286,11 @@ _PyTime_FromFloatObject(_PyTime_t *t, double value, _PyTime_round_t round,
     d *= (double)unit_to_ns;
     d = _PyTime_Round(d, round);
 
-    *t = (_PyTime_t)d;
-    err = d - (double)*t;
-    if (fabs(err) >= 1.0) {
+    if (!_Py_InIntegralTypeRange(_PyTime_t, d)) {
         _PyTime_overflow();
         return -1;
     }
+    *t = (_PyTime_t)d;
     return 0;
 }


I don't think that modifying _Py_InIntegralTypeRange() macro to replace "<=" with "<" is correct, since this bug is very specific to pytime.c, when _Py_InIntegralTypeRange() is used with a double. The PR proposes:

#define _Py_InIntegralTypeRange(type, v) (_Py_IntegralTypeMin(type) <= v && v < _Py_IntegralTypeMax(type))