| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 10:58:26 +0200 From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> To: Thomas Meyer <thomas@...3r.de> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] sys_poll: Fix negative timeout values for x86 userland on x86_64 kernels v2 Le dimanche 18 septembre 2011 à 10:04 +0200, Thomas Meyer a écrit : > size of int and long differs on x86 and x86_64. the ia32 emulation calls > directly into the sys_poll function. when the timeout is set to -1 > the test for sign will fail in sys_poll as the 64bit register is tested. > the timeout timer will be set to 0xffffffff milliseconds, but the timer > shouldn't get set at all in this situation. > As I said, you should CC stable@...nel.org team on this patch. All previous linux versions had this bug : A program might misbehave because of a spurious poll(..., timeout < 0) wakeup. Could you please refine this Changelog again ? On 32bit user program, all negative timeout values should not set a timout at all, not only 0xffffffff (-1) man poll states : The timeout argument specifies an upper limit on the time for which poll() will block, in milliseconds. Specifying a negative value in timeout means an infinite timeout. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists