netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next] selftests/bpf: fix nanosleep for real this time

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:56:55 +0100
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, ast@...com
Cc:     andrii.nakryiko@...il.com, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next] selftests/bpf: fix nanosleep for real this
 time

On 3/14/20 1:27 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> Amazingly, some libc implementations don't call __NR_nanosleep syscall from
> their nanosleep() APIs. Hammer it down with explicit syscall() call and never
> get back to it again. Also simplify code for timespec initialization.
> 
> I verified that nanosleep is called w/ printk and in exactly same Linux image
> that is used in Travis CI. So it should both sleep and call correct syscall.
> 
> v1->v2:
>    - math is too hard, fix usec -> nsec convertion (Martin);
>    - test_vmlinux has explicit nanosleep() call, convert that one as well.
> 
> Fixes: 4e1fd25d19e8 ("selftests/bpf: Fix usleep() implementation")
> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>

Applied, thanks!