linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] signal: Store pending signal exit in tsk.jobctl not in tsk.pending

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:   Wed, 6 Feb 2019 19:07:54 +0100
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        jolsa@...hat.com, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] signal: Store pending signal exit in tsk.jobctl not
 in tsk.pending

Eric, at al,

Sorry, I am on on vacation, can't even read this thread right now,
so I am not sure I understand the problem correctly...

On 02/05, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> @@ -2393,6 +2393,11 @@ bool get_signal(struct ksignal *ksig)
>  		goto relock;
>  	}
>
> +	/* Has this task already been flagged for death? */
> +	ksig->info.si_signo = signr = SIGKILL;
> +	if (current->jobctl & JOBCTL_TASK_EXIT)
> +		goto fatal;
> +

Can't we simply change, say, next_signal() to return SIGKILL if it is
pending?

In any case, I am not sure we need JOBCTL_TASK_EXIT. Can't we rely on
signal_group_exit() ?

Oleg.