From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
Zhouping Liu <zliu@redhat.com>, CAI Qian <caiqian@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [RFC] time: Fix problem with large timespecs & ktime_get_update_offsets
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:49:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50195E20.90704@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1208010850510.32033@ionos>
On 07/31/2012 11:52 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2012, John Stultz wrote:
>> There's currently a slight difference in ktime_get_update_offsets()
>> vs ktime_get() which can result in boot time crashes when booting
>> with insane CMOS clock values larger then ~2264.
>>
>> ktime_get() does basically the following:
>> return timespec_to_ktime(timespec_add(xtime, wall_to_monotonic))
>>
>> Where as ktime_get_update_offsets does approximately:
>> return ktime_sub(timespec_to_ktime(xtime), realtime_offset);
>>
>> The problem is, at boot we set xtime = year 8200 and
>> wall_to_monotonic = year -8200, ktime_get adds both values, mostly
>> nulling the difference out (leaving only how long the system has been
>> up), then converts that relatively small value to a ktime_t properly
>> without losing any information.
>>
>> ktime_get_update_offsets however, since it converts xtime (again set
>> to some value greater then year 8200), to a ktime, it gets clamped at
>> KTIME_MAX, then we subtract realtime_offset, which is _also_ clamped
>> at KTIME_MAX, resulting in us always returning almost[1] zero. This
>> causes us to stop expiring timers.
>>
>> Now, one of the reasons Thomas and I changed the logic was that using
>> the precalculated realtime_offset was slightly more efficient then
>> re-adding xtime and wall_to_monotonic's components separately. But
>> how valuable this unmeasured slight efficiency is vs extra
>> robustness for crazy time values is questionable.
>>
>> So switch back to the ktime_get implementation for
>> ktime_get_update_offsets
> NAK.
>
> You're papering over the real problem: Using crap values without
> sanity checking them in the first place.
>
> All your patch does is papering over the problem. Heck, year 8200 is
> obvious bullshit, so we can detect and reject it.
Ok, sounds good. I'll drop this one and just keep the sanity checking patch.
thanks
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-01 16:50 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 [this message]
2012-07-31 6:35 ` [PATCH 2/2] [RFC] time: Limit time values that would overflow ktime_t John Stultz
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=50195E20.90704@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