linux-kernel - Re: Is this a kernel BUG? ///Re: [Question] Can we use SIGRTMIN when vdso disabled on X86?

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 7 Jun 2018 14:05:45 -0700
From:   "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:     "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86l <x86@...nel.org>,
        Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     yaomin2@...wei.com
Subject: Re: Is this a kernel BUG? ///Re: [Question] Can we use SIGRTMIN when
 vdso disabled on X86?

On 06/06/18 18:45, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:
>>
>> The use of signals without SA_RESTORER is considered obsolete, but it's somewhat surprising that the vdso isn't there; it should be mapped even for static binaries esp. on i386 since it is the preferred way to do system calls (you don't need to parse the ELF for that.) Are you explicitly disabling the VDSO? If so, Don't Do That.
> 
> Yes, the vdso was explicitly disabled by the tester. Thanks.
> 

Are there any use cases that calls for this?  Maybe we should drop this
option.

	-hpa