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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 12:49:17 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, selinux@...r.kernel.org, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>, Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>, "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Signal: Fix hard lockup problem in flush_sigqueue() On 03/22, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 05:45:08PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > > It was found that if a process has accumulated sufficient number of > > pending signals, the exiting of that process may cause its parent to > > have hard lockup when running on a debug kernel with a slow memory > > freeing path (like with KASAN enabled). > > I appreciate these are "reliable" signals, but why do we accumulate so > many signals to a task which will never receive them? Can we detect at > signal delivery time that the task is going to die and avoid queueing > them in the first place? A task can block the signal and accumulate up to RLIMIT_SIGPENDING signals, then it can exit. Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists