linux-kernel - Re: [regression] x86/signal/64: Fix SS handling for signals delivered to 64-bit programs breaks dosemu

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: <CA+55aFw5DzEn+jYmY0KwbkytBzowo45o3Czh1cQZ_aaR1+WZYA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:37:37 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Stas Sergeev <stsp@...t.ru>
Cc:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [regression] x86/signal/64: Fix SS handling for signals delivered
 to 64-bit programs breaks dosemu

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Stas Sergeev <stsp@...t.ru> wrote:
>
> I realize this patch may be good to have in general, but
> breaking userspace without a single warning is a bit
> discouraging. Seems like the old "we don't break userspace"
> rule have gone.

That rule hasn't gone anywhere.

Does a plain revert just fix everything? Because if so, that's the
right thing to do, and we can just re-visit this later.

I don't understand why Andy and Ingo are even discussing this. What
the f*ck, guys?

Stas, can you verify that this actually fixes it? There's two
different versions here: one that reverts *just* that one commit, and
one that reverts the fs/gs changes too. Can you test them both?

                          Linus

View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/plain" (4655 bytes)

View attachment "patch-minimal.diff" of type "text/plain" (2970 bytes)