mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, trini@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] Validate itimer timeval from userspace
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 12:07:28 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060318120728.63cbad54.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060318142830.607556000@localhost.localdomain>

Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> 
> According to the specification the timeval must be validated and
> an errorcode -EINVAL returned in case the timeval is not in canonical
> form. Before the hrtimer merge this was silently ignored by the 
> timeval to jiffies conversion. The validation is done inside 
> do_setitimer so all callers are catched.
> 
> ...
> 
> --- linux-2.6.16-rc6-updates.orig/include/linux/time.h
> +++ linux-2.6.16-rc6-updates/include/linux/time.h
> @@ -73,6 +73,12 @@ extern void set_normalized_timespec(stru
>  #define timespec_valid(ts) \
>  	(((ts)->tv_sec >= 0) && (((unsigned long) (ts)->tv_nsec) < NSEC_PER_SEC))
>  
> +/*
> + * Returns true if the timeval is in canonical form
> + */
> +#define timeval_valid(t) \
> +	(((t)->tv_sec >= 0) && (((unsigned long) (t)->tv_usec) < USEC_PER_SEC))
> +
>  extern struct timespec xtime;
>  extern struct timespec wall_to_monotonic;
>  extern seqlock_t xtime_lock;
> Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6-updates/kernel/itimer.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.16-rc6-updates.orig/kernel/itimer.c
> +++ linux-2.6.16-rc6-updates/kernel/itimer.c
> @@ -150,6 +150,14 @@ int do_setitimer(int which, struct itime
>  	ktime_t expires;
>  	cputime_t cval, cinterval, nval, ninterval;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Validate the timeval. This catches all users of
> +	 * do_setitimer.
> +	 */
> +	if (!timeval_valid(&value->it_value) ||
> +	    !timeval_valid(&value->it_interval))
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
>  	switch (which) {
>  	case ITIMER_REAL:
>  again:

>From my reading, 2.4's sys_setitimer() will normalise the incoming timeval
rather than rejecting it.  And I think 2.6.13 did that too.

It would be bad of us to change this behaviour, even if that's what the
spec says we should do - because we can break existing applications.

So I think we're stuck with it - we should normalise and then accept such
timevals.  And we should have a big comment explaining how we differ from
the spec, and why.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-03-18 20:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-03-18 15:18 [patch 0/2] sys_setitimer and sys_alarm hotfixes Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-18 15:18 ` [patch 1/2] Validate itimer timeval from userspace Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-18 19:10   ` Ingo Molnar
2006-03-18 19:57     ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-18 20:07   ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2006-03-18 20:16     ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-18 20:31       ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-18 20:38         ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-18 21:09           ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-18 21:26             ` Jesper Juhl
2006-03-18 21:33               ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-18 21:50                 ` Jesper Juhl
2006-03-18 22:05             ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-18 22:25               ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-18 23:12                 ` tglx
2006-03-18 20:45         ` Jesper Juhl
2006-03-18 22:02           ` Ray Lee
2006-03-18 23:14           ` Eric Piel
2006-03-19  8:55             ` Kyle Moffett
2006-03-18 20:23     ` Jesper Juhl
2006-03-18 20:30       ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-18 21:04         ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-21 15:31           ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-18 15:18 ` [patch 2/2] alarm unsigned signed conversion fixup Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-18 20:02   ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-18 20:12   ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-18 20:27     ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-18 21:06       ` Andrew Morton

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=20060318120728.63cbad54.akpm@osdl.org \
    --to=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=trini@kernel.crashing.org \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®