linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, arch/*/*/*signal*.c and all such

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, 25 Apr 2012 19:02:30 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, arch/*/*/*signal*.c and all such

On 04/25, Al Viro wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 05:46:11PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > 	--- x/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
> > 	+++ x/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
> > 	@@ -711,6 +711,13 @@ handle_signal(unsigned long sig, siginfo
> > 				regs->ax = regs->orig_ax;
> > 				regs->ip -= 2;
> > 				break;
> > 	+
> > 	+		case -EINTR:
> > 	+			break;
> > 	+
> > 	+		default:
> > 	+			if (regs->orig_ax == NR_eintr)
> > 	+				regs->ax = NR_eintr;
> > 			}
> > 		}
> > 	
> > 	@@ -791,6 +798,7 @@ static void do_signal(struct pt_regs *re
> > 			case -ERESTARTSYS:
> > 			case -ERESTARTNOINTR:
> > 				regs->ax = regs->orig_ax;
> > 	+			regs->orig_ax = NR_eintr;
> > 				regs->ip -= 2;
> > 				break;
> > 	
> >
> > this ignores ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK for simplicity.
>
> Ehh...  You do realize that it's that simple only on architectures that
> have syscall number in a register?

No, I do not ;) I simply know nothing about other architectures.

> Take a look at e.g. insert_restart_trampoline()
> in arch/parisc/kernel/signal.c

Will do. Not sure I will be able to undestand it though. And btw I still
didn't look at the signal patches in your tree, I've just returned from
vacation today.

> I'm not sure that SA_RESTART case is actually worth bothering with -

Neither me. But,

> AFAICS, your mechanism won't cover SA_RESTART/SA_RESTART/!SA_RESTART
> combinations anyway,

Confused. The hack above doesn't even try to cover this case (and it is
obviously wrong in ERESTARTSYS/NOINTR case), I only tried to illustrate
the idea.

> 	syscall interrupted
> 		SA_RESTART signal arrives, handler1 entered
> 			!SA_RESTART signal arrives, handler2 entered
> 			handler2 returns
> 		hander1 returns
> 	syscall restarts

And there is another case:

	syscall interrupted, it returns ERESTARTSYS.

	do_signal() sees no signal, restarts the syscall

	!SA_RESTART comes before we return to user-mode

This doesn't really differ from sigsuspend/ERESTARTNOHAND we discussed
before.

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/