linux-kernel - Re: Use of SIGXFSZ outside of soft limits

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:	Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:43:01 -0700
From:	Micah Cowan <micah@...an.name>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Use of SIGXFSZ outside of soft limits

Alan Cox wrote:
>> [XSI] [Option Start] If the request would cause the file size to exceed 
>> the soft file size limit for the process and there is no room for any 
>> bytes to be written, the request shall fail and the implementation shall 
>> generate the SIGXFSZ signal for the thread. [Option End]
>>  >>>
> 
> This all depends which document and version you review. AIX for example
> has or had the same behaviour as Linux which comes from the Large File
> Summit and indeed our implementation was carefully tested to pass the
> test suite of the time.
> 
> SUSv3 seems to subsume the older LFS standards, and has adjusted them
> somewhat in the merging so there may well be a good case for normalizing
> our behaviour to match SUSv3. Run some tests and send patches.
> 
> Alan

Thanks very much for this response, Alan.

I kind of suspected it might be something like this. I'm relieved to 
know that the original reasons for signaling that on other cases may no 
longer apply.

I'll plan to be back with patches, then! :)

-Micah
-
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/