linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7][v4] Define siginfo_from_ancestor

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:	Sat, 27 Dec 2008 12:38:36 -0800
From:	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	ebiederm@...ssion.com, roland@...hat.com, bastian@...di.eu.org,
	daniel@...ac.com, xemul@...nvz.org, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7][v4] Define siginfo_from_ancestor_ns()

Oleg Nesterov [oleg@...hat.com] wrote:
| On 12/24, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
| >
| > Oleg Nesterov [oleg@...hat.com] wrote:
| > | And, SI_ASYNCIO only matters when we send the signal to the subnamespace,
| > | and in that case we will probably mangle .si_pid. So why don't we warn
| > | when .si_code == SI_USER?
| >
| > I was wondering if I should there too :-) But what do you think ?
| 
| Well, if you ask me, I'd suggest to document the problems with
| sigqueueinfo() and forget. Whatever we do, we can't be always
| right.

Ok.  According to
http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online/pages/man2/rt_sigqueueinfo.2.html.
rt_sigqueueinfo() is not directly published to users and users can't be
passing in siginfo_t directly. So no man page update is needed either ? 

Sukadev
--
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/