From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Xunlei Pang <xpang@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC v4] timekeeping: ignore the bogus sleep time if
 pm_trace is enabled
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 19:04:28 +0800
Message-ID: <57B5963C.7030101@redhat.com>
References: <1471517019-15216-1-git-send-email-yu.c.chen@intel.com>
 <1471516611.2157.22.camel@suse.com>
Reply-To: xlpang@redhat.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48850 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1945902AbcHRLE1 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 18 Aug 2016 07:04:27 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1471516611.2157.22.camel@suse.com>
Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
To: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com>, Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org, "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Xunlei Pang <xlpang@redhat.com>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 2016/08/18 at 18:36, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 18:43 +0800, Chen Yu wrote:
>> Previously we encountered some memory overflow issues due to
>> the bogus sleep time brought by inconsistent rtc, which is
>> triggered when pm_trace is enabled, please refer to:
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9286365/
>> It's improper in the first place to call __timekeeping_inject_sleeptime()
>> in case that pm_trace is enabled simply because that "hash" time value
>> will wreckage the timekeeping subsystem.
> Hi,
>
> do you know since when this bug exists?

Hi Oliver,

I think it should be since __timekeeping_inject_sleeptime() was updated to use @delta
of timespec64 type, which lets it survive the former timespec_valid_strict() check and
then results in an index larger than 31 into sleep_time_bin[] in subsequent call.

Regards,
Xunlei

>
>>  /**
>> @@ -1662,6 +1668,12 @@ void timekeeping_resume(void)
>>  	} else if (timespec64_compare(&ts_new, &timekeeping_suspend_time) > 0) {
>>  		ts_delta = timespec64_sub(ts_new, timekeeping_suspend_time);
>>  		sleeptime_injected = true;
>> +		/*
>> +		 * If rtc is used as persist clock thus it
>> +		 * would be bogus when pm_trace is enabled.
>> +		 */
>> +		if (!persistent_clock_is_usable())
>> +			sleeptime_injected = false;
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	if (sleeptime_injected)
> How about
>
> sleeptime_injected = persistent_clock_is_usable();
>
> 	Regards
> 		Oliver
>
>