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:	Sat, 05 Jan 2008 18:18:25 +0000
From:	"Phil Endecott" <phil_wueww_endecott@...zphil.org>
To:	"Andreas Schwab" <schwab@...e.de>
Cc:	"Jiri Slaby" <jirislaby@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Frederik Deweerdt" <deweerdt@...e.fr>
Subject: Re: strace, accept(), ERESTARTSYS and EINTR

Andreas Schwab wrote:
> "Phil Endecott" <phil_wueww_endecott@...zphil.org> writes:
>
>> However, there's a lot of code and I know that there are bugs in it.  I
>> just want to focus on the kernel-related issue that the strace fragment
>> that I posted brings up:  even if my user code gets completely screwed up
>> (corrupts its stack, runs out of FDs/VM/threads etc), I don't think that I
>> should see in the strace output that accept() has returned
>> ERESTARTSYS.
>
> strace always sees the raw return value, before the signal handler is
> executed and before the check for syscall restart is done.

Yes, but I should see the real final return value in another strace 
output line before I see that thread doing something else.  Correct?  
Here's the strace output again.  Look at what thread 11079 does:

[pid 11079] accept(3,  <unfinished ...>
[pid 11093] restart_syscall(<... resuming interrupted call ...>
<unfinished ...>
[pid  8799] --- SIGSTOP (Stopped (signal)) @ 0 (0) ---
[pid 11079] <... accept resumed> 0xbfdaa73c, [16]) = ? ERESTARTSYS (To
be restarted)
[pid  8799] read(6,  <unfinished ...>
[pid 11079] fcntl64(-512, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = -1 EBADF (Bad file descriptor)

strace reports accept() returning ERESTARTSYS, and the next thing we 
see from that thread is the call to fcntl(), which is the next thing 
that my code does.

Phil.




--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ