linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF

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, 05 Jun 2007 17:27:33 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>
Cc:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other
	woes

On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 23:09 -0700, Nicholas Miell wrote:
> signalfd() doesn't deliver thread-targeted signals to the wrong
> threads,
> does it?
> 
> Hmm.
> 
> It looks like reading from a signalfd will give you either
> process-global signals or the thread-specific signals that are
> targeted
> towards the thread that originally created the signalfd (regardless of
> which thread actually calls read()).
> 
> Which is weird, to say the least. Definitely needs to be noted in the
> man page, which doesn't seem to exist yet.
> 
> Is there a reason why signalfd() doesn't behave like regular signals
> in
> this regard? 

It's worse than that ... by being able to call dequeue_signal from the
contxt of another thread than the one dequeuing from.

Ben.


-
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/