[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1316336306.31335.8.camel@edumazet-laptop>
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