Re: [PATCH 1/1] aio: make sure the input "timeout" value is valid
From: Deepa Dinamani
Date: Tue Mar 27 2018 - 00:43:15 EST
On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:01:30PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> I had suggested a more complete helper function at some point,
>> to take care of all combinations of checking/non-checking, 32/64
>> bit, microsecond/nanosecond, and zeroing/checking the upper 32 bits
>> of nanoseconds before comparing against 1 billion, but Deepa
>> thought that was overkill, so I didn't continue that.
>
> Yeah, that sounds like a nightmare to use ;-)
>
>> For all I can tell, the get_timespec64() helper should almost always
>> include the check, the one exception I know is utimensat() and related
>> functions that may encode the special UTIME_NOW and UTIME_OMIT
>> constants in the nanoseconds.
>
> So do you endorse the get_valid_timespec64() patch I posted up-thread?
> We can't just make get_timespec64 return an errno directly because it'll
> require changing all the users.
I missed this thread earlier.
I had leaned away from this idea before, because of the special cases
which don't need it. I was also trying to keep the syntax close to
copy_from_user(), which is what was there before.
We could probably just change all the
get_timespec64()/compat_get_timespec64() to do the check using a
simple coccinelle script.
I can own this.
But, this would not be needed if Arnd is posting the other helper function.
Arnd, let me know what you prefer here.
-Deepa