linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] signals: introduce send

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20100616185942.72D2.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:00:59 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@...g.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] signals: introduce send_sigkill() helper

> Andrew, please drop
> 
> 	signals-introduce-send_sigkill-helper.patch
> 
> I am stupid.
> 
> On 06/10, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Cleanup, no functional changes.
> >
> > There are a lot of buggy SIGKILL users in kernel. For example, almost
> > every force_sig(SIGKILL) is wrong. force_sig() is not safe, it assumes
> > that the task has the valid ->sighand, and in general it should be used
> > only for synchronous signals. send_sig(SIGKILL, p, 1) or
> > send_xxx(SEND_SIG_FORCED/SEND_SIG_PRIV) is not right too but this is not
> > immediately obvious.
> >
> > The only way to correctly send SIGKILL is send_sig_info(SEND_SIG_NOINFO)
> 
> No, SEND_SIG_NOINFO doesn't work too. Oh, can't understand what I was
> thinking about. current is the random task, but send_signal() checks
> if the caller is from-parent-ns.
> 
> > Note: we need more cleanups here, this is only the first change.
> 
> We need the cleanups first. Until then oom-killer has to use force_sig()
> if we want to kill the SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE tasks too.

This definitely needed. OOM-Killer is not racist ;)

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/