linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 43/43] ncpfs: Use set_current

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]

Date:	Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:36:27 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Petr Vandrovec <petr@...drovec.name>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 43/43] ncpfs: Use set_current_blocked()

On 08/19, Matt Fleming wrote:
>
> From: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>
>
> As described in e6fa16ab ("signal: sigprocmask() should do
> retarget_shared_pending()") the modification of current->blocked is
> incorrect as we need to check whether the signal we're about to block
> is pending in the shared queue.
>
> Also, there's no need to hold sighand->siglock while reading
> sighand->action[] because the lock is dropped across the call to
> do_ncp_rpc_call() during which time another thread could modify
> ->action[].

Unlless you object, I am going to add the following into the changelog:

	Note: the current code does the strange things which nobody can
	explain, especially the PF_EXITING/SIGKILL thing. This patch does
	try to change this.

and push the patch into ptrace branch.

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/