[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47BA3D53.6010307@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:22:11 +0800
From: Shi Weihua <shiwh@...fujitsu.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] signal(x86_64): add a signal stack overflow check
The similar check has been added to x86_32(i386) in commit
id 83bd01024b1fdfc41d9b758e5669e80fca72df66.
So we add this check to x86_64 and improve it a liitle bit in that
we need to check for stack overflow only when the signal is on stack.
Signed-off-by: Shi Weihua <shiwh@...fujitsu.com>
---
The previous patch has a comment mistake. Now I correct it.
---
--- linux-2.6.25-rc2.orig/arch/x86/kernel/signal_64.c 2008-02-16 04:57:20.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.25-rc2/arch/x86/kernel/signal_64.c 2008-02-19 09:56:20.000000000 +0800
@@ -205,8 +205,19 @@ get_stack(struct k_sigaction *ka, struct
/* This is the X/Open sanctioned signal stack switching. */
if (ka->sa.sa_flags & SA_ONSTACK) {
- if (sas_ss_flags(sp) == 0)
+ int onstack = sas_ss_flags(sp);
+
+ if (onstack == 0)
sp = current->sas_ss_sp + current->sas_ss_size;
+ else if (onstack == SS_ONSTACK) {
+ /*
+ * If we are on the alternate signal stack and would
+ * overflow it, don't. Return an always-bogus address
+ * instead so we will die with SIGSEGV.
+ */
+ if (!likely(on_sig_stack(sp - size)))
+ return (void __user *) -1L;
+ }
}
return (void __user *)round_down(sp - size, 16);
--
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