* [nft PATCH 1/2] meta: don't assume time_t is 64 bit in date_type_print()
@ 2023-08-22 8:13 Thomas Haller
2023-08-22 8:13 ` [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions Thomas Haller
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Haller @ 2023-08-22 8:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: NetFilter; +Cc: Thomas Haller
time_t on 32bit arch is not uint64_t. Even if it always were, it would
be ugly to make such an assumption (without a static assert). Copy the
value to a time_t variable first.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Haller <thaller@redhat.com>
---
src/meta.c | 13 ++++++++-----
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/meta.c b/src/meta.c
index 822c2fd12b6f..0d4ae0261ff2 100644
--- a/src/meta.c
+++ b/src/meta.c
@@ -385,20 +385,23 @@ const struct datatype ifname_type = {
static void date_type_print(const struct expr *expr, struct output_ctx *octx)
{
- uint64_t tstamp = mpz_get_uint64(expr->value);
+ uint64_t tstamp64 = mpz_get_uint64(expr->value);
+ time_t tstamp;
struct tm *tm, *cur_tm;
char timestr[21];
/* Convert from nanoseconds to seconds */
- tstamp /= 1000000000L;
+ tstamp64 /= 1000000000L;
/* Obtain current tm, to add tm_gmtoff to the timestamp */
- cur_tm = localtime((time_t *) &tstamp);
+ tstamp = tstamp64;
+ cur_tm = localtime(&tstamp);
if (cur_tm)
- tstamp += cur_tm->tm_gmtoff;
+ tstamp64 += cur_tm->tm_gmtoff;
- if ((tm = gmtime((time_t *) &tstamp)) != NULL &&
+ tstamp = tstamp64;
+ if ((tm = gmtime(&tstamp)) != NULL &&
strftime(timestr, sizeof(timestr) - 1, "%Y-%m-%d %T", tm))
nft_print(octx, "\"%s\"", timestr);
else
--
2.41.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions 2023-08-22 8:13 [nft PATCH 1/2] meta: don't assume time_t is 64 bit in date_type_print() Thomas Haller @ 2023-08-22 8:13 ` Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 8:54 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2023-08-22 8:54 ` [nft PATCH 1/2] meta: don't assume time_t is 64 bit in date_type_print() Pablo Neira Ayuso 2023-08-22 9:06 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Thomas Haller @ 2023-08-22 8:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: NetFilter; +Cc: Thomas Haller These functions are POSIX.1-2001. We should have them in all environments we care about. Use them as they are thread-safe. Signed-off-by: Thomas Haller <thaller@redhat.com> --- src/meta.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/meta.c b/src/meta.c index 0d4ae0261ff2..d087e56e1b84 100644 --- a/src/meta.c +++ b/src/meta.c @@ -387,7 +387,7 @@ static void date_type_print(const struct expr *expr, struct output_ctx *octx) { uint64_t tstamp64 = mpz_get_uint64(expr->value); time_t tstamp; - struct tm *tm, *cur_tm; + struct tm tm; char timestr[21]; /* Convert from nanoseconds to seconds */ @@ -395,14 +395,12 @@ static void date_type_print(const struct expr *expr, struct output_ctx *octx) /* Obtain current tm, to add tm_gmtoff to the timestamp */ tstamp = tstamp64; - cur_tm = localtime(&tstamp); - - if (cur_tm) - tstamp64 += cur_tm->tm_gmtoff; + if (localtime_r(&tstamp, &tm)) + tstamp64 += tm.tm_gmtoff; tstamp = tstamp64; - if ((tm = gmtime(&tstamp)) != NULL && - strftime(timestr, sizeof(timestr) - 1, "%Y-%m-%d %T", tm)) + if (gmtime_r(&tstamp, &tm) && + strftime(timestr, sizeof(timestr) - 1, "%Y-%m-%d %T", &tm)) nft_print(octx, "\"%s\"", timestr); else nft_print(octx, "Error converting timestamp to printed time"); @@ -410,7 +408,8 @@ static void date_type_print(const struct expr *expr, struct output_ctx *octx) static bool parse_iso_date(uint64_t *tstamp, const char *sym) { - struct tm tm, *cur_tm; + struct tm cur_tm; + struct tm tm; time_t ts; memset(&tm, 0, sizeof(struct tm)); @@ -432,14 +431,15 @@ success: */ ts = timegm(&tm); - /* Obtain current tm as well (at the specified time), so that we can substract tm_gmtoff */ - cur_tm = localtime(&ts); + if (ts == (time_t) -1) + return false; - if (ts == (time_t) -1 || cur_tm == NULL) + /* Obtain current tm as well (at the specified time), so that we can substract tm_gmtoff */ + if (!localtime_r(&ts, &cur_tm)) return false; /* Substract tm_gmtoff to get the current time */ - *tstamp = ts - cur_tm->tm_gmtoff; + *tstamp = ts - cur_tm.tm_gmtoff; return true; } @@ -494,15 +494,13 @@ static void day_type_print(const struct expr *expr, struct output_ctx *octx) static void hour_type_print(const struct expr *expr, struct output_ctx *octx) { uint32_t seconds = mpz_get_uint32(expr->value), minutes, hours; - struct tm *cur_tm; + struct tm cur_tm; time_t ts; /* Obtain current tm, so that we can add tm_gmtoff */ ts = time(NULL); - cur_tm = localtime(&ts); - - if (cur_tm) - seconds = (seconds + cur_tm->tm_gmtoff) % SECONDS_PER_DAY; + if (ts != ((time_t) -1) && localtime_r(&ts, &cur_tm)) + seconds = (seconds + cur_tm.tm_gmtoff) % SECONDS_PER_DAY; minutes = seconds / 60; seconds %= 60; @@ -520,7 +518,9 @@ static struct error_record *hour_type_parse(struct parse_ctx *ctx, struct expr **res) { struct error_record *er; - struct tm tm, *cur_tm; + struct tm cur_tm_data; + struct tm *cur_tm; + struct tm tm; uint32_t result; uint64_t tmp; char *endptr; @@ -537,7 +537,10 @@ static struct error_record *hour_type_parse(struct parse_ctx *ctx, /* Obtain current tm, so that we can substract tm_gmtoff */ ts = time(NULL); - cur_tm = localtime(&ts); + if (ts != ((time_t) -1) && localtime_r(&ts, &cur_tm_data)) + cur_tm = &cur_tm_data; + else + cur_tm = NULL; endptr = strptime(sym->identifier, "%T", &tm); if (endptr && *endptr == '\0') -- 2.41.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions 2023-08-22 8:13 ` [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions Thomas Haller @ 2023-08-22 8:54 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2023-08-22 11:39 ` Thomas Haller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2023-08-22 8:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Haller; +Cc: NetFilter On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 10:13:10AM +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > These functions are POSIX.1-2001. We should have them in all > environments we care about. > > Use them as they are thread-safe. Also applied, thanks ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions 2023-08-22 8:54 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2023-08-22 11:39 ` Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 15:15 ` Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 16:04 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Thomas Haller @ 2023-08-22 11:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pablo Neira Ayuso; +Cc: NetFilter On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 10:54 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 10:13:10AM +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > > These functions are POSIX.1-2001. We should have them in all > > environments we care about. > > > > Use them as they are thread-safe. > > Also applied, thanks > Hi Pablo, One more consideration, that I didn't realize before. Sorry about that. localtime() will always call tzset(). And localtime_r() is documented that it may not call it. https://linux.die.net/man/3/localtime_r I checked implementations, AFAIS, musl will always call do_tzset() ([1]). glibc will only ensure that tzset() was called at least once ([2]). [1] https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/src/time/__tz.c?id=83b858f83b658bd34eca5d8ad4d145f673ae7e5e#n369 [2] https://codebrowser.dev/glibc/glibc/time/tzset.c.html#577 It's not clear to me, whether it would be more correct/desirable to always call tzset() before localtime_r(). I think it would only matter, if the timezone were to change (e.g. update /etc/localtime). nftables calls localtime_r() from print/parse functions. Presumably, we will print/parse several timestamps during a larger operation, it would be odd to change/reload the timezone in between or to meaningfully support that. I think it is all good, nothing to change. Just to be aware of. Thomas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions 2023-08-22 11:39 ` Thomas Haller @ 2023-08-22 15:15 ` Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 16:06 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2023-08-22 16:04 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Thomas Haller @ 2023-08-22 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pablo Neira Ayuso; +Cc: NetFilter On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 13:39 +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 10:54 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > > nftables calls localtime_r() from print/parse functions. Presumably, > we > will print/parse several timestamps during a larger operation, it > would > be odd to change/reload the timezone in between or to meaningfully > support that. > > > I think it is all good, nothing to change. Just to be aware of. > Thinking some more, the "problem" is that when we parse a larger data, then multiple subfields are parsed. Thereby we call "time()" and "localtime()" multiple times. The time() keeps ticking, and time and tz can be reset at any moment -- so we see different time/tz, in the middle of parsing the larger set of data. What IMO should happen, is that for one parse operation, we call such operations at most once, and cache them in `struct netlink_parse_ctx`. Is that considered a problem to be solved? Seems simple. Would you accept a patch for that? Thomas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions 2023-08-22 15:15 ` Thomas Haller @ 2023-08-22 16:06 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2023-08-22 16:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Haller; +Cc: NetFilter On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 05:15:14PM +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 13:39 +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > > On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 10:54 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > > > > > nftables calls localtime_r() from print/parse functions. Presumably, > > we > > will print/parse several timestamps during a larger operation, it > > would > > be odd to change/reload the timezone in between or to meaningfully > > support that. > > > > > > I think it is all good, nothing to change. Just to be aware of. > > > > Thinking some more, the "problem" is that when we parse a larger data, > then multiple subfields are parsed. Thereby we call "time()" and > "localtime()" multiple times. The time() keeps ticking, and time and tz > can be reset at any moment -- so we see different time/tz, in the > middle of parsing the larger set of data. > > What IMO should happen, is that for one parse operation, we call such > operations at most once, and cache them in `struct netlink_parse_ctx`. > > Is that considered a problem to be solved? Seems simple. Would you > accept a patch for that? Caching this information in the context should be fine, and it might speed up things for a large batch? How complicate will the update look like? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions 2023-08-22 11:39 ` Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 15:15 ` Thomas Haller @ 2023-08-22 16:04 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2023-08-22 16:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Haller; +Cc: NetFilter On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 01:39:20PM +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > Hi Pablo, > > One more consideration, that I didn't realize before. Sorry about that. > > localtime() will always call tzset(). And localtime_r() is documented > that it may not call it. > > https://linux.die.net/man/3/localtime_r > > I checked implementations, AFAIS, musl will always call do_tzset() > ([1]). glibc will only ensure that tzset() was called at least once > ([2]). > > [1] https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/src/time/__tz.c?id=83b858f83b658bd34eca5d8ad4d145f673ae7e5e#n369 > [2] https://codebrowser.dev/glibc/glibc/time/tzset.c.html#577 > > It's not clear to me, whether it would be more correct/desirable to > always call tzset() before localtime_r(). I think it would only matter, > if the timezone were to change (e.g. update /etc/localtime). > > nftables calls localtime_r() from print/parse functions. Presumably, we > will print/parse several timestamps during a larger operation, it would > be odd to change/reload the timezone in between or to meaningfully > support that. You mean, timezone change while there is a 'list ruleset' command might be an issue is what you mean? > I think it is all good, nothing to change. Just to be aware of. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [nft PATCH 1/2] meta: don't assume time_t is 64 bit in date_type_print() 2023-08-22 8:13 [nft PATCH 1/2] meta: don't assume time_t is 64 bit in date_type_print() Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 8:13 ` [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions Thomas Haller @ 2023-08-22 8:54 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2023-08-22 9:06 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2023-08-22 8:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Haller; +Cc: NetFilter On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 10:13:09AM +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > time_t on 32bit arch is not uint64_t. Even if it always were, it would > be ugly to make such an assumption (without a static assert). Copy the > value to a time_t variable first. Applied, thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [nft PATCH 1/2] meta: don't assume time_t is 64 bit in date_type_print() 2023-08-22 8:13 [nft PATCH 1/2] meta: don't assume time_t is 64 bit in date_type_print() Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 8:13 ` [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 8:54 ` [nft PATCH 1/2] meta: don't assume time_t is 64 bit in date_type_print() Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2023-08-22 9:06 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2023-08-22 9:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Haller; +Cc: NetFilter On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 10:13:09AM +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > diff --git a/src/meta.c b/src/meta.c > index 822c2fd12b6f..0d4ae0261ff2 100644 > --- a/src/meta.c > +++ b/src/meta.c > @@ -385,20 +385,23 @@ const struct datatype ifname_type = { > > static void date_type_print(const struct expr *expr, struct output_ctx *octx) > { > - uint64_t tstamp = mpz_get_uint64(expr->value); > + uint64_t tstamp64 = mpz_get_uint64(expr->value); > + time_t tstamp; > struct tm *tm, *cur_tm; > char timestr[21]; For the record: I made this edit before applying: uint64_t tstamp64 = mpz_get_uint64(expr->value); struct tm *tm, *cur_tm; char timestr[21]; time_t tstamp; following reverse xmas tree layout, it is a comestic coding style issue. Not all the codebase follows this approach, but this is usually preferred. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-08-22 16:06 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2023-08-22 8:13 [nft PATCH 1/2] meta: don't assume time_t is 64 bit in date_type_print() Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 8:13 ` [nft PATCH 2/2] meta: use reentrant localtime_r()/gmtime_r() functions Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 8:54 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2023-08-22 11:39 ` Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 15:15 ` Thomas Haller 2023-08-22 16:06 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2023-08-22 16:04 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2023-08-22 8:54 ` [nft PATCH 1/2] meta: don't assume time_t is 64 bit in date_type_print() Pablo Neira Ayuso 2023-08-22 9:06 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).