linux-kernel - Re: [uml-devel] [REVIEW][PATCH 19/22] signal/um: Use force_sig_fault in relay

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 25 Apr 2018 01:03:39 +0300
From:   Martin Pärtel <martin.partel@...il.com>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...-begemot.co.uk>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
        Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>, linux-um@...ts.infradead.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
        <user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [uml-devel] [REVIEW][PATCH 19/22] signal/um: Use force_sig_fault
 in relay_signal.

And once more in plain text..

On 25 April 2018 at 01:00, Martin Pärtel <martin.partel@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> This was ages ago, but from what I remember...
>
>>
>> Having a second look I really don't understand what relay_signal is
>> trying to do.
>>
>> The function relay_signal does not pass siginfo through unchanged.
>
>
> Just copying the entire struct would do the wrong thing. It was discussed here:
> https://marc.info/?l=user-mode-linux-devel&m=133910707911999&w=2
>
>>
>> Am I missing something subtle or have the subtle details of siginfo just
>> always been ignored?
>
>
> My guess is they have. I was almost certainly oblivious to such subtleties when writing my commit.
>