linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] signal(x86_32): Improve the signal stack overflow check

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: <47BA3ACB.30408@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:11:23 +0800
From:	Shi Weihua <shiwh@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] signal(x86_32): Improve the signal stack overflow
 check



Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote::
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:22:05 +0800, Shi Weihua said:
> 
>> -	/*
>> -	 * If we are on the alternate signal stack and would overflow it, don't.
>                                                                    notice this ^
>> -	 * Return an always-bogus address instead so we will die with SIGSEGV.
> 
>> +			 * If we are on the alternate signal stack and would
>> +			 * overflow it, don't return an always-bogus address
>                                 missing here ^
>> +			 * instead so we will die with SIGSEGV.
> 
> "don't. Return" is a vastly different semantic than "don't return".
> 
> I think the same comment error was cut-n-pasted into all 5 patches...
> 

Sorry, it's my mistake.
I will correct the all 5 patches. Thanks.

--
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/