[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 12:14:53 -0800
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Clock control algorithms (Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] x86: Use latch
data structure for cyc2ns)
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 9:34 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> There is a huge difference between something that breaks after 2^32 and 2^64 events. Very few computers will ever be able to have 2^64 events of any kind in their lifetime, never mind a single boot.
Given that struct seqcount contains an "unsigned" counter, the 32-bit
wraparound thing could be a problem in practice. I hope there aren't
security vulnerabilities in which userspace overflows a kernel
refcount, seqcount, or other similar structure.
--Andy
--
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