linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 20/40] mn10300: 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Tue, 14 Feb 2012 18:12:59 +0000
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com, Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
	Koichi Yasutake <yasutake.koichi@...panasonic.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, linux-am33-list@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/40] mn10300: Use set_current_blocked() and block_sigmask()

Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:

> No, only current can change ->blocked. This is even documented in
> sigprocmask(). And more, the only correct way to change ->blocked
> is set_current_blocked(). OK, with a couple of "I know what I am
> doing" exceptions in kernel/signal.c.

I was looking at force_sig_info() and derivatives.  Is that what you refer to?

If so, is it worth providing a force_sig_info_current(),
force_sigsegv_current() and force_sig_current() to make things clearer to grep
for, I wonder?

David
--
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/