linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] signal: Adjust error codes according to restore_user

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]

Message-ID: <CABeXuvrKAz3epJjc9J21K-dET1Om9C=3gaDOUiQ96C39x4MAVg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 May 2019 14:06:45 -0700
From:   Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "dbueso@...e.de" <dbueso@...e.de>,
        "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, Eric Wong <e@...24.org>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        Linux FS-devel Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-aio <linux-aio@...ck.org>,
        Omar Kilani <omar.kilani@...il.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] signal: Adjust error codes according to restore_user_sigmask()

> Just adding a little more clarification, there is an additional change
> between [a] and [b].
> As per [a] we would just restore the signal instead of changing the
> saved_sigmask and the signal could get delivered right then. [b]
> changes this to happen at syscall exit:

Rewording above, as there seems to be a few misrepresentations:

Just adding a little more clarification, there is an additional change
between [a] and [b].
As per [a] we would just restore the signal mask instead of changing
the saved_sigmask and the even the blocked signals could get delivered
right then. [b] changes the restoration to happen at syscall exit:

> void restore_user_sigmask(const void __user *usigmask, sigset_t *sigsaved)
> {
>
>            <snip>
>
>           /*
>            * When signals are pending, do not restore them here.
>            * Restoring sigmask here can lead to delivering signals
> that the above
>            * syscalls are intended to block because of the sigmask passed in.
>            */
>            if (signal_pending(current)) {
>            current->saved_sigmask = *sigsaved;
>            set_restore_sigmask();
>            return;
> }

 -Deepa