linux-kernel - [RFC PATCH v3 2/7] timekeeping: Fix cross-timestamp interpolation corner case decision

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: <20231218073849.35294-3-peter.hilber@opensynergy.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 08:38:40 +0100
From: Peter Hilber <peter.hilber@...nsynergy.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Peter Hilber <peter.hilber@...nsynergy.com>,
	John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
	"Christopher S. Hall" <christopher.s.hall@...el.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH v3 2/7] timekeeping: Fix cross-timestamp interpolation corner case decision

The cycle_between() helper checks if parameter test is in the open interval
(before, after). Colloquially speaking, this also applies to the counter
wrap-around special case before > after. get_device_system_crosststamp()
currently uses cycle_between() at the first call site to decide whether to
interpolate for older counter readings.

get_device_system_crosststamp() has the following problem with
cycle_between() testing against an open interval: Assume that, by chance,
cycles == tk->tkr_mono.cycle_last (in the following, "cycle_last" for
brevity). Then, cycle_between() at the first call site, with effective
argument values cycle_between(cycle_last, cycles, now), returns false,
enabling interpolation. During interpolation,
get_device_system_crosststamp() will then call cycle_between() at the
second call site (if a history_begin was supplied). The effective argument
values are cycle_between(history_begin->cycles, cycles, cycles), since
system_counterval.cycles == interval_start == cycles, per the assumption.
Due to the test against the open interval, cycle_between() returns false
again. This causes get_device_system_crosststamp() to return -EINVAL.

This failure should be avoided, since get_device_system_crosststamp() works
both when cycles follows cycle_last (no interpolation), and when cycles
precedes cycle_last (interpolation). For the case cycles == cycle_last,
interpolation is actually unneeded.

Fix this by changing cycle_between() into timestamp_in_interval(), which
now checks against the closed interval, rather than the open interval.

This changes the get_device_system_crosststamp() behavior for three corner
cases:

1. Bypass interpolation in the case cycles == tk->tkr_mono.cycle_last,
   fixing the problem described above.

2. At the first timestamp_in_interval() call site, cycles == now no longer
   causes failure.

3. At the second timestamp_in_interval() call site, history_begin->cycles
   == system_counterval.cycles no longer causes failure.
   adjust_historical_crosststamp() also works for this corner case,
   where partial_history_cycles == total_history_cycles.

These behavioral changes should not cause any problems.

Fixes: 2c756feb18d9 ("time: Add history to cross timestamp interface supporting slower devices")
Signed-off-by: Peter Hilber <peter.hilber@...nsynergy.com>
---

Notes:
    v3:

    - switch back to v1 style closed interval test (Thomas Gleixner)
    - document effect of closed interval test on corner cases
    - do not carry "Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>" due to above
      changes

    v2:

    - try to clarify problem description (John Stultz)
    - simplify fix

 kernel/time/timekeeping.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
index 08a3d0052baa..24ffd681aa23 100644
--- a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
+++ b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
@@ -1180,13 +1180,15 @@ static int adjust_historical_crosststamp(struct system_time_snapshot *history,
 }

 /*
- * cycle_between - true if test occurs chronologically between before and after
+ * timestamp_in_interval - true if ts is chronologically in [start, end]
+ *
+ * True if ts occurs chronologically at or after start, and before or at end.
  */
-static bool cycle_between(u64 before, u64 test, u64 after)
+static bool timestamp_in_interval(u64 start, u64 end, u64 ts)
 {
-	if (test > before && test < after)
+	if (ts >= start && ts <= end)
 		return true;
-	if (before > after && (test > before || test < after))
+	if (start > end && (ts >= start || ts <= end))
 		return true;
 	return false;
 }
@@ -1247,7 +1249,7 @@ int get_device_system_crosststamp(int (*get_time_fn)
 		 */
 		now = tk_clock_read(&tk->tkr_mono);
 		interval_start = tk->tkr_mono.cycle_last;
-		if (!cycle_between(interval_start, cycles, now)) {
+		if (!timestamp_in_interval(interval_start, now, cycles)) {
 			clock_was_set_seq = tk->clock_was_set_seq;
 			cs_was_changed_seq = tk->cs_was_changed_seq;
 			cycles = interval_start;
@@ -1278,13 +1280,13 @@ int get_device_system_crosststamp(int (*get_time_fn)
 		bool discontinuity;

 		/*
-		 * Check that the counter value occurs after the provided
+		 * Check that the counter value is not before the provided
 		 * history reference and that the history doesn't cross a
 		 * clocksource change
 		 */
 		if (!history_begin ||
-		    !cycle_between(history_begin->cycles,
-				   system_counterval.cycles, cycles) ||
+		    !timestamp_in_interval(history_begin->cycles,
+					   cycles, system_counterval.cycles) ||
 		    history_begin->cs_was_changed_seq != cs_was_changed_seq)
 			return -EINVAL;
 		partial_history_cycles = cycles - system_counterval.cycles;
-- 
2.40.1