# Re: timerfd-add-tfd\_notify\_clock\_set-to-watch-for-clock-changes.patch added to -mm tree

- From: Alexander Shishkin \<hidden\>
- Date: 2011-03-11 15:09:03 
- List: linux-api
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2011/03/3688779
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2011/03/3688754/t.md

```text
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 02:50:23PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > @@ -218,10 +266,12 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(timerfd_settime, int, uf
> >  	 * it to the new values.
> >  	 */
> >  	for (;;) {
> > +		spin_lock(&notifiers_lock);
> >  		spin_lock_irq(&ctx->wqh.lock);
> > -		if (hrtimer_try_to_cancel(&ctx->tmr) >= 0)
> > +		if (!list_empty(&notifiers_list) || hrtimer_try_to_cancel(&ctx->tmr) >= 0)
> >  			break;
> 
> Confused. Why do we check the global notifiers_list?

You're right, it's a bug, should be &ctx->notifiers_list.

> IOW. Suppose that this list is not empty and timerfd_settime() is called
> without TFD_NOTIFY_CLOCK_SET. Now we are going to reprogramm the timer
> without stopping it?
> 
> And. What if timerfd_settime(TFD_NOTIFY_CLOCK_SET, utmr => NULL) is called
> twice? timerfd_setup() blindly does list_add(), and we corrupt the list, no?

Another catch.

There will be a quite a bit of rework required, though, considering tglx's
comments.

Thanks!
--
Alex
```