linux-kernel - [164/200] perf: Fix signed comparison in perf_adjust

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

Message-Id: <20100701174300.409169512@clark.site>
Date:	Thu, 01 Jul 2010 10:44:14 -0700
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Cc:	stable-review@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: [164/200] perf: Fix signed comparison in perf_adjust_period()

2.6.34-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>

commit f6ab91add6355e231e1c47897027b2a6ee4fa268 upstream.

Frederic reported that frequency driven swevents didn't work properly
and even caused a division-by-zero error.

It turns out there are two bugs, the division-by-zero comes from a
failure to deal with that in perf_calculate_period().

The other was more interesting and turned out to be a wrong comparison
in perf_adjust_period(). The comparison was between an s64 and u64 and
got implicitly converted to an unsigned comparison. The problem is
that period_left is typically < 0, so it ended up being always true.

Cure this by making the local period variables s64.

Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Tested-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
LKML-Reference: <new-submission>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>

---
 kernel/perf_event.c |    5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/kernel/perf_event.c
+++ b/kernel/perf_event.c
@@ -1456,6 +1456,9 @@ do {					\
 		divisor = nsec * frequency;
 	}
 
+	if (!divisor)
+		return dividend;
+
 	return div64_u64(dividend, divisor);
 }
 
@@ -1478,7 +1481,7 @@ static int perf_event_start(struct perf_
 static void perf_adjust_period(struct perf_event *event, u64 nsec, u64 count)
 {
 	struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw;
-	u64 period, sample_period;
+	s64 period, sample_period;
 	s64 delta;
 
 	period = perf_calculate_period(event, nsec, count);


--
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/