lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH 4.4 103/190] rtc: interface: Validate alarm-time before handling rollover
Date
4.4-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.vnet.ibm.com>


[ Upstream commit da96aea0ed177105cb13ee83b328f6c61e061d3f ]

In function __rtc_read_alarm() its possible for an alarm time-stamp to
be invalid even after replacing missing components with current
time-stamp. The condition 'alarm->time.tm_year < 70' will trigger this
case and will cause the call to 'rtc_tm_to_time64(&alarm->time)'
return a negative value for variable t_alm.

While handling alarm rollover this negative t_alm (assumed to seconds
offset from '1970-01-01 00:00:00') is converted back to rtc_time via
rtc_time64_to_tm() which results in this error log with seemingly
garbage values:

"rtc rtc0: invalid alarm value: -2-1--1041528741
2005511117:71582844:32"

This error was generated when the rtc driver (rtc-opal in this case)
returned an alarm time-stamp of '00-00-00 00:00:00' to indicate that
the alarm is disabled. Though I have submitted a separate fix for the
rtc-opal driver, this issue may potentially impact other
existing/future rtc drivers.

To fix this issue the patch validates the alarm time-stamp just after
filling up the missing datetime components and if rtc_valid_tm() still
reports it to be invalid then bails out of the function without
handling the rollover.

Reported-by: Steve Best <sbest@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
drivers/rtc/interface.c | 9 ++++++++-
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/drivers/rtc/interface.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/interface.c
@@ -217,6 +217,13 @@ int __rtc_read_alarm(struct rtc_device *
missing = year;
}

+ /* Can't proceed if alarm is still invalid after replacing
+ * missing fields.
+ */
+ err = rtc_valid_tm(&alarm->time);
+ if (err)
+ goto done;
+
/* with luck, no rollover is needed */
t_now = rtc_tm_to_time64(&now);
t_alm = rtc_tm_to_time64(&alarm->time);
@@ -268,9 +275,9 @@ int __rtc_read_alarm(struct rtc_device *
dev_warn(&rtc->dev, "alarm rollover not handled\n");
}

-done:
err = rtc_valid_tm(&alarm->time);

+done:
if (err) {
dev_warn(&rtc->dev, "invalid alarm value: %d-%d-%d %d:%d:%d\n",
alarm->time.tm_year + 1900, alarm->time.tm_mon + 1,

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-11 22:31    [W:0.715 / U:1.908 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site