linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v9 for 4.15 01/14] Restartable sequences system call

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:   Tue, 17 Oct 2017 16:41:03 +0000
From:   Ben Maurer <bmaurer@...com>
To:     Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
CC:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, carlos <carlos@...hat.com>,
        "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        David Goldblatt <davidgoldblatt@...com>,
        "Qi Wang" <qiwang@...com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Andrew Hunter <ahh@...gle.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Chris Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Russell King" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 for 4.15 01/14] Restartable sequences system call

> I have a use-case for keeping the reference counting in place though. It's
> use of rseq in signal handlers.

Would this be solved by saying that the rseq api will return an error if you register and there's already a block registered. In this case the signal handler would register the rseq abi area just as the non-signal code is trying to do the same. The non-signal code would see this error code and realize that its job had been done for it and then go on it's way.

It would be unsafe for signal handler code to *unregister* the area, but I don't think that's necessary.

Basically we'd support a refcount of either 0 or 1, but nothing else.

If a signal handler registers the ABI area, how will it ensure the ABI is cleaned up at thread exit? I can't imagine pthread_key is signal safe.