linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] signal: sighand unprotected when accessed by /proc

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: <20140603192525.GA1105@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 3 Jun 2014 21:25:25 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] signal: sighand unprotected when accessed by /proc

On 06/03, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> You know, this code could use some comments. I may send you a patch,
> because that __lock_task_sighand() is doing a lot of subtle things and
> there's not a single comment explaining it :-(

Yes, agreed. Not only SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU is not obvious, local_irq_save()
is not clear at all. The latter already has a doc patch from Paul, I'll try
to add more comments on top once I see that patch in Linus's tree.

But I would be happy if you send the patch ;)

And this reminds me... I still think that __lock_task_sighand() should be
de-uglified. I already sent the patch, probably I'll resend it.

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/