linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Use ERESTARTNOHAND if poll() is interrupted by a signal

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, 31 Jul 2007 10:36:11 -0700
From:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use ERESTARTNOHAND if poll() is interrupted by a signal

* Oleg Nesterov (oleg@...sign.ru) wrote:
> > I am not sure. This means we restart sys_poll() with the same timeout
> > if there is no pending signal. I think we need ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK
> > logic.
> 
> Forgot to mention, sys_select() can use ERESTARTNOHAND because it
> modifies "struct timeval __user *tvp" before return, but sys_poll()
> gets timeout_msecs by value.

Yeah, you're right.  Means sys_poll with STOP/CONT cycles going in
background (and no fds ready) would never return.
-
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/