[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACAVd4iXVH2U41msVKhT4GBGgE=2V2oXnOXkQUQKSSh72HMMmw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 15:52:09 +0530
From: Arul Jeniston <arul.jeniston@...il.com>
To: viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, tglx@...utronix.de
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
arul_mc@...l.com, ARUL JENISTON MC <arul.jeniston@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] FS: timerfd: Fix unexpected return value of timerfd_read function.
'hrtimer_forward_now()' returns zero due to bigger backward time drift.
This causes timerfd_read to return 0. As per man page, read on timerfd
is not expected to return 0.
This problem is well explained in https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/7/31/442
. This patch fixes this problem.
Signed-off-by: Arul Jeniston <arul.jeniston@...il.com>
---
fs/timerfd.c | 12 ++++++++++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/timerfd.c b/fs/timerfd.c
index 6a6fc8aa1de7..f5094e070e9a 100644
--- a/fs/timerfd.c
+++ b/fs/timerfd.c
@@ -284,8 +284,16 @@ static ssize_t timerfd_read(struct file *file,
char __user *buf, size_t count,
&ctx->t.alarm, ctx->tintv) - 1;
alarm_restart(&ctx->t.alarm);
} else {
- ticks += hrtimer_forward_now(&ctx->t.tmr,
- ctx->tintv) - 1;
+ u64 nooftimeo = hrtimer_forward_now(&ctx->t.tmr,
+ ctx->tintv);
+ /*
+ * ticks shouldn't become zero at this point.
+ * Ignore if hrtimer_forward_now returns 0
+ * due to larger backward time drift.
+ */
+ if (likely(nooftimeo)) {
+ ticks += nooftimeo - 1;
+ }
hrtimer_restart(&ctx->t.tmr);
}
}
--
2.11.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists