linux-kernel - Re: [RFC, PATCH] signals: print_fatal_signal: fix the signr "calculation"

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:22:13 +0300
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] signals: print_fatal_signal: fix the signr "calculation"

On 03/10, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> > For various reasons we can't currently do the same for sig_kernel_coredump()
> > signals. But, when rlim[RLIMIT_CORE] == 0, we don't actually need coredumping?
> > So, we could do something like
> > 
> > 
> > 	-	if (!sig_kernel_coredump(sig)) {
> > 	+	if (!sig_kernel_coredump(sig) || !signal->rlim[RLIMIT_CORE]) {
> 
> I don't like this.  I think it's better to leave logic like RLIMIT_CORE
> checks to the core dump code itself.

As I said, this was just for illustration.

What I am thinking about is how to restore the "sig_kernel_coredump() signal
freezes the whole group on delivery" behaviour, we had this before
198466b41d11dd062fb26ee0376080458d7bfcaf.

Afaics this is possible, we could add another SIGNAL_XXX flag but send SIGKILL,
this also unifies the fatal signals processing.

Oleg.

--
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/