linux-kernel - Re: [path][rfc] add PR_DETACH prctl command [3/3]

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110419181733.GA30702@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 19 Apr 2011 20:17:33 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Stas Sergeev <stsp@...et.ru>
Cc:	Linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [path][rfc] add PR_DETACH prctl command [3/3]

On 04/19, Stas Sergeev wrote:
>
> 19.04.2011 21:20, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
>>>> do_signal_parent() must not return DEATH_REAP (this means that
>>>> leader->exit_signal becomes -1), but this can happen and this is bug.
>>>>
>>> Could you please clarify this a bit: according to the comments
>>> in signal.c:
>>> ---
>>>                   * We are exiting and our parent doesn't care.  POSIX.1
>>>                   * defines special semantics for setting SIGCHLD to SIG_IGN
>>>                   * or setting the SA_NOCLDWAIT flag: we should be reaped
>>>                   * automatically and not left for our parent's wait4 call.
>>> ---
>>> That's how I understand it: if DEATH_REAP is returned, the
>>> parent ignores SIGCHILD, and in this case I am not allowing
>>> it to read the detach code with wait(). What is the bug?
>> Indeed. But, once again, that is why do_notify_parent() expects the dead
>> tsk! Please note that if it returns DEATH_REAP it sets ->exit_signal = -1.
>> And this is _only_ allowed if the leader is already dead and we are going
>> to reap it.
> Ah, so, by saying "do_signal_parent() must not return DEATH_REAP (this means that
> leader->exit_signal becomes -1)", you actually meant
> "do_signal_parent(), when returning DEATH_REAP, must not
> set ->exit_signal = -1,

Yes.

> because only do_notify_parent()
> can do that"?

because we can only do this if we are going to reap the task

> If so - will fix, thanks.

Stas, please do not trim CC. I am very glad Alan looked at this patch,
I hope he will participate. Better yet, add Linus too as I already asked ;)

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/