linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 03/43] arm: Use set_current_blocked() and block

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:	Thu, 25 Aug 2011 18:15:56 +0100
From:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>,
	Dave Martin <dave.martin@...aro.org>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/43] arm: Use set_current_blocked() and
 block_sigmask()

Hi Matt,

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 05:46:19PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> From: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> As described in e6fa16ab ("signal: sigprocmask() should do
> retarget_shared_pending()") the modification of current->blocked is
> incorrect as we need to check for shared signals we're about to block.
> 
> Also, use the new helper function block_sigmask() which centralises
> the code for updating current->blocked after successfully delivering a
> signal and reduces the amount of duplicate code across
> architectures. In the past some architectures got this code wrong, so
> using this helper function should stop that from happening again.
> 
> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> Cc: Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>
> Cc: Dave Martin <dave.martin@...aro.org>
> Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
> 
> v2 of this patch depends on "[PATCH 01/43] signal: Add block_sigmask()
> for adding sigmask to current->blocked" so they need to go through the
> same tree but this patch would benefit from some maintainer ACK's.
> 
> Will, I dropped your Acked-by because I felt this patch changed quite
> dramatically since v1 and warrants another review. I hope that's OK.

Ok. Looks like the only change from v1 is calling block_sigmask. which does
what was previously done inline (in v1).

So you can keep my ack if you like!

Will
--
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/