From 3e96745119d46a80b044b72634169621fc814dde Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Gleixner Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 19:16:17 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] hrtimers: avoid overflow for large relative timeouts (CVE-2007-5966) patch 62f0f61e6673e67151a7c8c0f9a09c7ea43fe2b5 in mainline Relative hrtimers with a large timeout value might end up as negative timer values, when the current time is added in hrtimer_start(). This in turn is causing the clockevents_set_next() function to set an huge timeout and sleep for quite a long time when we have a clock source which is capable of long sleeps like HPET. With PIT this almost goes unnoticed as the maximum delta is ~27ms. The non-hrt/nohz code sorts this out in the next timer interrupt, so we never noticed that problem which has been there since the first day of hrtimers. This bug became more apparent in 2.6.24 which activates HPET on more hardware. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- kernel/hrtimer.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/kernel/hrtimer.c b/kernel/hrtimer.c index 23c03f43e196..355e867f4a3e 100644 --- a/kernel/hrtimer.c +++ b/kernel/hrtimer.c @@ -825,6 +825,14 @@ hrtimer_start(struct hrtimer *timer, ktime_t tim, const enum hrtimer_mode mode) #ifdef CONFIG_TIME_LOW_RES tim = ktime_add(tim, base->resolution); #endif + /* + * Careful here: User space might have asked for a + * very long sleep, so the add above might result in a + * negative number, which enqueues the timer in front + * of the queue. + */ + if (tim.tv64 < 0) + tim.tv64 = KTIME_MAX; } timer->expires = tim; -- 2.39.5