Re: [PATCH -next] io_uring: use timespec64_valid() to verify time value

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



ping...

On 2021/12/2 14:49, Ye Bin wrote:
It's better to use timespec64_valid() to verify time value.

Fixes: 2087009c74d4("io_uring: validate timespec for timeout removals")
Fixes: f6223ff79966("io_uring: Fix undefined-behaviour in io_issue_sqe")
Signed-off-by: Ye Bin <yebin10@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
  fs/io_uring.c | 4 ++--
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
index 568729677e25..929ff732d6dc 100644
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c
@@ -6151,7 +6151,7 @@ static int io_timeout_remove_prep(struct io_kiocb *req,
  			return -EINVAL;
  		if (get_timespec64(&tr->ts, u64_to_user_ptr(sqe->addr2)))
  			return -EFAULT;
-		if (tr->ts.tv_sec < 0 || tr->ts.tv_nsec < 0)
+		if (!timespec64_valid(&tr->ts))
  			return -EINVAL;
  	} else if (tr->flags) {
  		/* timeout removal doesn't support flags */
@@ -6238,7 +6238,7 @@ static int io_timeout_prep(struct io_kiocb *req, const struct io_uring_sqe *sqe,
  	if (get_timespec64(&data->ts, u64_to_user_ptr(sqe->addr)))
  		return -EFAULT;
- if (data->ts.tv_sec < 0 || data->ts.tv_nsec < 0)
+	if (!timespec64_valid(&data->ts))
  		return -EINVAL;
data->mode = io_translate_timeout_mode(flags);




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux