Re: [patch 1/2] Validate itimer timeval from userspace

* Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:

> According to the specification the timeval must be validated and an 
> errorcode -EINVAL returned in case the timeval is not in canonical 
> form. Before the hrtimer merge this was silently ignored by the 
> timeval to jiffies conversion. The validation is done inside 
> do_setitimer so all callers are catched.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>

ok - bad (invalid) timevals were thus randomly interpreted? I agree that 
even though this is new behavior, it is much better to return -EINVAL 
than to behave randomly. OTOH, since 2.6.15 and earlier did this too, is 
there any urgency to apply this to 2.6.16?

Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch 1/2] Validate itimer timeval from userspace
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [patch 0/2] sys_setitimer and sys_alarm hotfixes
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • [patch 1/2] Validate itimer timeval from userspace
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] for 2.6.16, disable unshare_vm()
• Next by Date: Re: 2.6.16-rc6: known regressions (v2)
• Previous by thread: [patch 1/2] Validate itimer timeval from userspace
• Next by thread: Re: [patch 1/2] Validate itimer timeval from userspace
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]