lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 23:47:30 -0300 From: "Julio Auto" <mindvortex@...il.com> To: "Solar Designer" <solar@...nwall.com> Cc: "Willy Tarreau" <w@....eu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] loop.c: kernel_thread() retval check On 8/20/06, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > You need to make sure that the cleanup code added with the patch matches > the loop device initialization preceding the kernel_thread() call. You > should not blindly take the cleanup code out of the 2.4 patch and apply > it to 2.6 - it might not be correct for 2.6. Yes, I already had that in mind, but thanks for the worry, anyway. > No. But you won't be able to reproduce this with strace on 2.6 since > 2.6's kernel_thread() uses CLONE_UNTRACED instead of failing on ptrace. > You'll probably need to temporarily replace the kernel_thread() call in > loop.c with -EAGAIN to comfortably test your cleanup code without > forcing the system to run out of resources. Thanks for the tip. I'll see what I can do. :) Cheers, Julio Auto - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists