5.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com
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@vger.kernel.org Fixes: 0606f422b453 ("posix clocks: Introduce dynamic clocks") Acked-by: Richard Cochran richardcochran@gmail.com Suggested-by: Andrew Lunn andrew@lunn.ch Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner tglx@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20241009072302.1754567-2-ruanjinjie@huawei.com Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski kuba@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org --- 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