Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 12 Jan 1999 09:46:50 +1100 (EST) | From | Matthew Hannigan <> | Subject | Re: Serious bug in recent Linux kernels |
| |
<delurk>
Dan Kegel <dank@alumni.caltech.edu> writes > timeout*HZ can overflow and produce a bad positive result for > some values of timeout, I think. Assuming timeout is > a long (I don't have the source handy), how about > if ((timeout < 0) || (timeout > LONG_MAX/HZ)) > timeout =3D MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT; > else if (timeout > 0) > timeout =3D (timeout*HZ+999)/1000+1;
Wouldn't it be wise to be explicit the assumptions on the range of HZ by preceding things like this with assertions?
The assertion could crash or do a printk; either way it'd be something.
-- -Matt
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |