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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-Id: <1182551618.24740.79.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Sat, 23 Jun 2007 08:33:38 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
	Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Fix signalfd interaction with thread-private signals


> 
> It does exactly so, please note this chunk
> 
>  @@ -330,7 +339,7 @@ asmlinkage long sys_signalfd(int ufd, si
> 
>                  init_waitqueue_head(&ctx->wqh);
>                  ctx->sigmask = sigmask;
>  -               ctx->tsk = current;
>  +               ctx->tsk = current->group_leader;
> 
> > It might well be that signalfd's concept of context is wrong in the
> > first place and it should be attached to processes rather than threads
> > and that made more explicit in the first place...

Yup, looks like I was looking at a wrong patch... I think it's the right
thing to do indeed.

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/