linux-kernel - NSIG/_NSIG sigset_t definition for 32 bit x86 in kernel head file

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CADUXgx6px7VzcnnGGTHKGgGEEbDsKmw0AjKbpEUKO1Mk50qpHw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:48:02 +0800
From:	Fengwei Yin <yfw.kernel@...il.com>
To:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: NSIG/_NSIG sigset_t definition for 32 bit x86 in kernel head file

Hi,
In arch/x86/include/asm/signal.h, _NSIG/NSIG and sigset_t definition don't match
for kernel (64, 8 bytes) and for user space (32, 4 bytes). But the
syscall rt_sigaction
checks the sigset size from user space. If it doesn't match sigset
size in kernel,
the syscall return failure.

I checked the glibc and it doesn't inherit the definition from kernel head file.
It use its own definition. So should these definition for user space
in kernel head be
removed and just let user space use its own definition?

I know it doesn't impact generic code because libc implementation
hides it. But what
about the libc (not glibc) implementation?

Regards
yfw
--
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/