linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 19/41] OpenRISC: No need to reset handler if SA

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: <20110816165309.GB29190@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:53:09 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/41] OpenRISC: No need to reset handler if SA_ONESHOT

On 08/11, Matt Fleming wrote:
>
> get_signal_to_deliver() already resets the signal handler if
> SA_ONESHOT is set in ka->sa.sa_flags,

Yes.

> there's no need to do it again
> in handle_signal().

Again, this code in fact does nothing, it plays with the copy.

> Furthermore, because we were modifying
> ka->sa.sa_handler without holding ->sighand->siglock there's the
> potential we can race with another thread if it modifies the signal
> handlers.

and thus this is not true.



Afaics, the changelog should be fixed but the patch is fine ;)

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/