[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1001260931490.5926@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:33:11 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
cc: Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mark Seaborn <mrs@...hic-beasts.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"hugh.dickins" <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: futex() on vdso makes process unkillable
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I like the creating-a-real-file solution. However, for now (and for
> > stable), I think Kosaki's suggestion of EINVAL or EFAULT is a good
> > stop-gap. EINVAL might play the best with existing glibc implementations.
>
> May I confirm your mention?
>
> If we can accept EFAULT, we don't need any change. my previous futex patch
> already did. because 1) VDSO is alwasys read-only mapped 2) write mode
> get_user_pages_fast() against read-only pte/vma return EFAULT.
>
> Current linus and stable tree don't cause Mark's original problem. instead, just
> return EFAULT. (Well, I'm sorry. my previous mail was unclear. I wrote v2.6.31 test
> result)
>
> If you can't accept EFAULT, we need to add vdso specific logic into get_futex_key().
EFAULT is perfectly fine. No need for any special tricks.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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