linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] signals: real-time signals delivery order

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 11 Jul 2007 07:34:14 +0000 (UTC)
From:	Matthieu CASTET <matthieu.castet@...rot.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject:  Re: [PATCH] signals: real-time signals delivery order

Anton Salikhmetov <salikhmetov <at> gmail.com> writes:

> 
> From: Anton Salikhmetov <salikhmetov <at> gmail.com>
> 
> According to the POSIX standard, multiple real-time signals
> pending to a process should be delivered in a strict order.
> Specifically, the lowest-numbered signal should be delivered
> first and multiple occurrences of signals with the same number
> should be delivered in FIFO order.
> 
> Current Linux kernel delivers the highest-numbered signals
> pending to a process first, not the lowest-numbered ones. This
> contradicts to the requirement explained above. The problem can
> be demonstrated by the following test program:
I believe you should check that you mask or signal in your signal handler.
If you don't the high-prio handler will be prempted by low-prio, and they will
be executed in the reverse order.


Matthieu 

-
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/