From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Zhouping Liu <zliu@redhat.com>, CAI Qian <caiqian@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] [RFC] time: Limit time values that would overflow ktime_t
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 02:35:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1343716548-38742-3-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1343716548-38742-1-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org>
We could observe unexpected behavior if the time is set
to a value large enough to overflow a 64bit ktime_t
(which is something larger then the year 2264).
So check timekeeping inputs to make sure we don't set
the time to a value that overflows ktime_t.
Note: This does not protect from setting the time close to
overflowing ktime_t and then letting natural accumulation
cause the overflow.
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Zhouping Liu <zliu@redhat.com>
Cc: CAI Qian <caiqian@redhat.com>
Reported-by: CAI Qian <caiqian@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
---
kernel/time/timekeeping.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
index 96179ab..78bccd0 100644
--- a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
+++ b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ __cacheline_aligned_in_smp DEFINE_SEQLOCK(xtime_lock);
/* flag for if timekeeping is suspended */
int __read_mostly timekeeping_suspended;
-
+#define TWENTY_YEARS (20LL*365*24*60*60)
/**
* timekeeper_setup_internals - Set up internals to use clocksource clock.
@@ -387,6 +387,9 @@ int do_settimeofday(const struct timespec *tv)
if ((unsigned long)tv->tv_nsec >= NSEC_PER_SEC)
return -EINVAL;
+ if ((unsigned long long)tv->tv_sec >= KTIME_SEC_MAX)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
write_seqlock_irqsave(&timekeeper.lock, flags);
timekeeping_forward_now();
@@ -418,6 +421,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(do_settimeofday);
int timekeeping_inject_offset(struct timespec *ts)
{
unsigned long flags;
+ struct timespec tmp;
+ int ret = 0;
if ((unsigned long)ts->tv_nsec >= NSEC_PER_SEC)
return -EINVAL;
@@ -426,10 +431,17 @@ int timekeeping_inject_offset(struct timespec *ts)
timekeeping_forward_now();
- timekeeper.xtime = timespec_add(timekeeper.xtime, *ts);
+ /* Make sure the increased value won't cause ktime_t trouble */
+ tmp = timespec_add(timekeeper.xtime, *ts);
+ if ((unsigned long long)tmp.tv_sec >= KTIME_SEC_MAX) {
+ ret= -EINVAL;
+ goto error;
+ }
+ timekeeper.xtime = tmp;
timekeeper.wall_to_monotonic =
timespec_sub(timekeeper.wall_to_monotonic, *ts);
+error: /* even if we error out, we forwarded the time, so call update */
timekeeping_update(true);
write_sequnlock_irqrestore(&timekeeper.lock, flags);
@@ -437,7 +449,7 @@ int timekeeping_inject_offset(struct timespec *ts)
/* signal hrtimers about time change */
clock_was_set();
- return 0;
+ return ret;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(timekeeping_inject_offset);
@@ -599,6 +611,16 @@ void __init timekeeping_init(void)
read_persistent_clock(&now);
read_boot_clock(&boot);
+ /*
+ * Check to make sure the persistent clock
+ * didn't return something crazy.
+ */
+ if (now.tv_sec > (KTIME_SEC_MAX - TWENTY_YEARS)) {
+ printk("WARNING: Persistent clock returned a year greater then"
+ " 2242. Capping at 2242.\n");
+ now.tv_sec = KTIME_SEC_MAX - TWENTY_YEARS;
+ }
+
seqlock_init(&timekeeper.lock);
ntp_init();
--
1.7.9.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-31 6:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-31 6:35 [PATCH 0/2][RFC] Better handling of insane CMOS values John Stultz
2012-07-31 6:35 ` [PATCH 1/2] [RFC] time: Fix problem with large timespecs & ktime_get_update_offsets John Stultz
2012-08-01 6:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2012-08-01 16:49 ` John Stultz
2012-07-31 6:35 ` John Stultz [this message]
2012-07-31 9:54 ` [PATCH 0/2][RFC] Better handling of insane CMOS values James Courtier-Dutton
2012-07-31 16:57 ` John Stultz
2012-07-31 11:31 ` Josh Boyer
2012-07-31 16:36 ` John Stultz
2012-07-31 17:41 ` Prarit Bhargava
2012-07-31 17:47 ` John Stultz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1343716548-38742-3-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org \
--to=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=caiqian@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zliu@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome