5.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@xxxxxxxxxx>
commit d8794ac20a299b647ba9958f6d657051fc51a540 upstream.
As Andrew pointed out, it will make sense that the PTP core
checked timespec64 struct's tv_sec and tv_nsec range before calling
ptp->info->settime64().
As the man manual of clock_settime() said, if tp.tv_sec is negative or
tp.tv_nsec is outside the range [0..999,999,999], it should return EINVAL,
which include dynamic clocks which handles PTP clock, and the condition is
consistent with timespec64_valid(). As Thomas suggested, timespec64_valid()
only check the timespec is valid, but not ensure that the time is
in a valid range, so check it ahead using timespec64_valid_strict()
in pc_clock_settime() and return -EINVAL if not valid.
There are some drivers that use tp->tv_sec and tp->tv_nsec directly to
write registers without validity checks and assume that the higher layer
has checked it, which is dangerous and will benefit from this, such as
hclge_ptp_settime(), igb_ptp_settime_i210(), _rcar_gen4_ptp_settime(),
and some drivers can remove the checks of itself.
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fixes: 0606f422b453 ("posix clocks: Introduce dynamic clocks")
Acked-by: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx>
Suggested-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>
Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@xxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20241009072302.1754567-2-ruanjinjie@xxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/time/posix-clock.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
--- a/kernel/time/posix-clock.c
+++ b/kernel/time/posix-clock.c
@@ -299,6 +299,9 @@ static int pc_clock_settime(clockid_t id
goto out;
}
+ if (!timespec64_valid_strict(ts))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
if (cd.clk->ops.clock_settime)
err = cd.clk->ops.clock_settime(cd.clk, ts);
else
