lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: How is Code in do_sys_settimeofday() safe in case of SMP and Nest Kernel Path?
On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Dong Feng wrote:

> --- kernel/time.c.orig 2006-09-30 23:21:29.000000000 +0800
> +++ kernel/time.c 2006-09-30 23:38:18.000000000 +0800
> @@ -107,7 +107,16 @@ asmlinkage long sys_gettimeofday(struct
> return -EFAULT;
> }
> if (unlikely(tz != NULL)) {
> - if (copy_to_user(tz, &sys_tz, sizeof(sys_tz)))
> + struct timezone ktz;
> + unsigned long seq;
> +
> + do {
> + seq = read_seqbegin(&xtime_lock);
> + ktz.tz_minuteswest = sys_tz.tz_minuteswest;
> + ktz.tz_dsttime = sys_tz.tz_dsttime;
> + } while (unlikely(read_seqretry(&xtime_lock, seq)));
> +
> + if (copy_to_user(tz, &ktz, sizeof(ktz)))
> return -EFAULT;

I really hate adding overhead to gettimeofday() and we would have to take
the seqlock in all places when we reference tz. Maybe we can tolerate the
resulting race?

If we assume word size transfers then we only have an issue on 32 bit
platforms. The result of the race would be that tz_minuteswest and
tz_dsttime disagree. So we may get daylight savings time wrong.
But then we are already changing the timezone and are potentially warping time.
gettimofday may be unstable anyways. So it may be okay to leave the race
in. Just add some comments explaining the situation.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-09-30 19:29    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans