linux-kernel - block: blk-timeout.c possible mishandling of jiffies wrap?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1267984064.2115.50.camel@localhost>
Date:	Sun, 07 Mar 2010 17:47:44 +0000
From:	Richard Kennedy <richard@....demon.co.uk>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: block: blk-timeout.c possible mishandling of jiffies wrap?

Hi Jens,

In blk_rq_timed_out_timer() in blk-timeout.c the comment at line 129
says that the request deadline can never be zero as that gets fixed in
blk_add_timer.

However commit 7838c15b8dd18e78a523513749e5b54bda07b0cb
removed the line that bumped deadline if zero.

So now AFAICT there's nothing to prevent deadline being zero, and
blk_rq_timed_out_timer may not always do the right thing when jiffies is
about to wrap.

There was a next_set flag in blk_rq_timed_out_timer but that's been
removed too.

Do you have any preferred fix? A next_set flag or a deadline bump or
something else?

regards
Richard

--
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/