[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100927104749.6377.46813.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 11:47:49 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: torvalds@...l.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-am33-list@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] mn10300: Avoid SIGSEGV delivery loop
From: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Use force_sigsegv() rather than force_sig(SIGSEGV, ...) as the former resets
the SEGV handler pointer which will kill the process, rather than leaving it
open to an infinite loop if the SEGV handler itself caused a SEGV signal.
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
---
arch/mn10300/kernel/signal.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/mn10300/kernel/signal.c b/arch/mn10300/kernel/signal.c
index 717db14..57178a8 100644
--- a/arch/mn10300/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/arch/mn10300/kernel/signal.c
@@ -345,7 +345,7 @@ static int setup_frame(int sig, struct k_sigaction *ka, sigset_t *set,
return 0;
give_sigsegv:
- force_sig(SIGSEGV, current);
+ force_sigsegv(sig, current);
return -EFAULT;
}
@@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ static int setup_rt_frame(int sig, struct k_sigaction *ka, siginfo_t *info,
return 0;
give_sigsegv:
- force_sig(SIGSEGV, current);
+ force_sigsegv(sig, current);
return -EFAULT;
}
--
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