linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] coredump: fix the ancient signal problems

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: <CACBanvoxwb341yO_hoJDDqZf9htgY2NNiOw0LfYj3TUe9zM5+w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:29:37 -0800
From:	Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] coredump: fix the ancient signal problems

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> These problems are really annoying. I reported and tried to fix
> them in 2008 (see http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121665710711931)
> but nobody was interested.
>
> Since then I had a lot of (to some degree contradictory) bug reports:
> we do not want the interrupted coredumps (this is what the current code
> tries to achieve but the logic is very wrong), but at the same time some
> people blame the coredump because it is not interruptible.
>
> And every time the discussion was confusing, it is not clear what should
> we actually do to make everyone happy.
>
> Linus, et al, could you please ack/nack the intent? Of course I will
> appreciate if you can review the code, but what I am actually worried
> about is the user-visible change: the coredumping becomes killable but
> only by the _explicit_ SIGKILL, other fatal signals are "ignored".
>
> The changes were not tested at all, I'll try to recheck everything and
> test this tomorrow. I am sending this series right now because I strongly
> believe that the recent -mm patches in this area are not right and should
> be dropped, and I also disagree with the pending v2.
>
> Mandeep, just in case please note that 1/3 alone should fix the problems
> with non-fatal signals and wait_dump_helper(). As for the freezer, afaics
> we are almost ready for the (slightly modified) fix proposed in
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136103469831268.
>
> Oleg.

For the whole series:

Tested-by: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>

This was an important issue for us so I'm in the process of merging
these into the ChromiumOS kernel tree.

Thanks,
Mandeep

>
>  fs/coredump.c         |   33 +++++++++++++++++++--------------
>  include/linux/sched.h |    1 +
>  kernel/signal.c       |    6 ++++--
>  3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
--
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/