linux-kernel - Re: Fix signalfd interaction with thread-private signals

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, 19 Jun 2007 16:16:33 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
cc:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Fix signalfd interaction with thread-private signals

On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> Well, I think the kernel doesn't make any assumptions on that. It can't
> guarantee the signal will be actually dequeued, to begin with.
> 
> (That said, I probably missed something, in that case I'd like to be
>  educated. This is the real reason why I am making the noise :)

What happens if a task gets a page fault that results in a SIGSEGV, and 
another task steals the SIGSEGV using a signalfd, before the faulted task 
has the chance to get into do_notify_resume() and notice it? ;)



- Davide


-
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/