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]
Message-ID: <20121126051002.GB4939@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 26 Nov 2012 05:10:02 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, monstr@...str.eu,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sigaltstack fun

On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 10:27:24PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> 
> Applied, thanks.

Hmm...  There's something odd going on with {rt_,}sigaction on sparc -
we *do* have sa_restorer in struct sigaction and struct old_sigaction,
but it's not used for anything whatsoever.  There's also a separately
passed restorer pointer for rt_sigaction() and *that* is used instead,
but not reported via *oact.

What's the reason for that weirdness?  I understand why we do that on
alpha (we have no sa_restorer in struct sigaction we'd inherited from
OSF/1), but sparc always had perfectly normal sigaction->sa_restorer
field all along - even for old sigaction(2)...
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ