Re: [PATCH] prevent timespec/timeval to ktime_t overflow
From: Frank v Waveren
Date: Wed Aug 30 2006 - 17:41:53 EST
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 10:44:28AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Frank v. Waveren pointed out that on 64bit machines the timespec to
> ktime_t conversion might overflow. This is also true for timeval to
> ktime_t conversions. This breaks a "sleep inf" on 64bit machines.
> Check the seconds argument to the conversion and limit it to the maximum
> time which can be represented by ktime_t.
It's a solution, and it more or less fixes things without any changes
to userspace, which is nice. I still prefer my patch in
<20060827083438.GA6931@xxxxxx> though, possibly with modifications so
it doesn't affect all timespec users but only nanosleep (we'd have to
check if the other timespec users aren't converting to ktime_t).
With this patch, we sleep shorter than specified, and don't signal
this in any way. Returning EINVAL for anything except negative tv_sec
or invalid tv_nsec breaks the spec too, but I prefer errors to
silently sleeping too short.
I'll grant this is more of an aesthetic point than something that'll
cause real-world problems (300 years is a long time for any sleep),
but if things break I like them to do so as loudly as possible, as a
Frank v Waveren Key fingerprint: BDD7 D61E
fvw@xxxxxx 5D39 CF05 4BFC F57A
Public key: hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net/468D62C8 FA00 7D51 468D 62C8
Description: Digital signature