linux-kernel - Re: Signal delivery order

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: <20090316002833.GA17615@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 16 Mar 2009 01:28:33 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Gábor Melis <mega@...es.hu>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Signal delivery order

On 03/15, Gábor Melis wrote:
>
> On Domingo 15 Marzo 2009, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > >
> > Now, since there are no more pending signals, we return to the user
> > space, and start sig_2().
>
> I see. I guess in addition to changing the ip, the stack frobbing magic
> arranges that sig_2 returns to sig_1 or some code that calls sig_1.

yes. "some code" == rt_sigreturn,

> The revised signal-delivery-order.c (also attached) outputs:
>
> test_handler=8048727
> sigsegv_handler=804872c
> eip: 8048727
> esp: b7d94cb8
>
> which shows that sigsegv_handler also has incorrect eip in the context.

Why do you think it is not correct?

I didn't try your test-case, but I can't see where "esp: b7d94cb8"
comes from. But "eip: 8048727" looks exactly right, this is the
address of test_handler.

Oleg.

--
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/