linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86 handle_vm86

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:17:29 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 handle_vm86_trap cleanup


* Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com> wrote:

> > for the record, this also changes semantics, because previously we'd 
> > permanently unblock SIGTRAP (most certainly as a hack, to be able to 
> > do the send_sig()), while now we use force_sig() which just ignores 
> > the blocked mask. (and i agree with your fix of course)
> 
> That's not so.  force_sig_info (called by force_sig) removes the 
> signal from the blocked set too.  That is the only way to get the 
> signal ever to be dequeued.

ah, indeed, i missed that :)

	Ingo
--
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/