Fix unexpected SA hard expiration after changing date

After SA is setup, one timer is armed to detect soft/hard expiration,
however the timer handler uses xtime to do the math. This makes hard
expiration occurs first before soft expiration after setting new date
with big interval. As a result new child SA is deleted before rekeying
the new one.

Signed-off-by: Fan Du <fdu@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
This commit is contained in:
Fan Du
2012-07-30 21:43:54 +00:00
committed by David S. Miller
parent 1485348d24
commit e3c0d04750
2 changed files with 21 additions and 4 deletions

View File

@@ -415,8 +415,17 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart xfrm_timer_handler(struct hrtimer * me)
if (x->lft.hard_add_expires_seconds) {
long tmo = x->lft.hard_add_expires_seconds +
x->curlft.add_time - now;
if (tmo <= 0)
goto expired;
if (tmo <= 0) {
if (x->xflags & XFRM_SOFT_EXPIRE) {
/* enter hard expire without soft expire first?!
* setting a new date could trigger this.
* workarbound: fix x->curflt.add_time by below:
*/
x->curlft.add_time = now - x->saved_tmo - 1;
tmo = x->lft.hard_add_expires_seconds - x->saved_tmo;
} else
goto expired;
}
if (tmo < next)
next = tmo;
}
@@ -433,10 +442,14 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart xfrm_timer_handler(struct hrtimer * me)
if (x->lft.soft_add_expires_seconds) {
long tmo = x->lft.soft_add_expires_seconds +
x->curlft.add_time - now;
if (tmo <= 0)
if (tmo <= 0) {
warn = 1;
else if (tmo < next)
x->xflags &= ~XFRM_SOFT_EXPIRE;
} else if (tmo < next) {
next = tmo;
x->xflags |= XFRM_SOFT_EXPIRE;
x->saved_tmo = tmo;
}
}
if (x->lft.soft_use_expires_seconds) {
long tmo = x->lft.soft_use_expires_seconds +