linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] signal: fix SIGCONT notification code

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: <20110112204136.GB13830@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net>
Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:41:36 +0100
From:	Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@...hat.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	oleg@...hat.com, roland@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	rjw@...k.pl
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] signal: fix SIGCONT notification code

On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 12:13:15 +0100, Tejun Heo wrote:
> If SIGCONT is received while the child process is stopped, the code should
> be CLD_CONTINUED.  If SIGCONT is recieved while the child process is in the
> process of being stopped, it should be CLD_STOPPED.

If a process does
	kill (PID, SIGSTOP);
	<varying delay, possibly even from a different process>
	kill (PID, SIGCONT);

does it mean the PID's parent may get different waitid() results?
Or even that PID will finally remain still `T (stopped)'?

I do not see it has any userland impact, the
PTRACE_ATTACH-to-T(stopped)-process is already racy for different reasons.


Thanks,
Jan
--
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/