linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kernel/signal.c: Export symbol __lock_task

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:   Mon, 22 Jun 2020 10:39:57 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
To:     Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
Cc:     Alexander Kapshuk <alexander.kapshuk@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, oleg@...hat.com,
        ebiederm@...ssion.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        liuzhiqiang26@...wei.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
        paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/signal.c: Export symbol __lock_task_sighand

On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 03:54:37PM +0200, Dominique Martinet wrote:
> Alexander Kapshuk wrote on Sun, Jun 21, 2020:
> > Export symbol __lock_task_sighand, so it is accessible from code compiled
> > as modules.
> > This fixes the following modpost error:
> > ERROR: modpost: "__lock_task_sighand" [net/9p/9pnet.ko] undefined!
> 
> This can't fix something that's not broken (yet)! :)
> 
> I think it'd make more sense to describe why you think we should export
> it, rather than describe a precise usecase e.g. justify why this would
> be interesting to use from modules (e.g. it would help modules like 9p
> take a lock on the current signal handler safely and cleanly through
> lock_task_sighand())
> 
> 
> 
> Christian, Andrew - assuming this passes reviews from someone else I'm
> not sure how to go forward with this; it'd be simpler for me if I could
> take it in the 9p tree as I need it for the patch Alexander pointed at,
> but I'm not normally touching any file outside of the 9p tree.
> Is it better to let either of you take it normally (I think it'd be
> you?) and wait for that to land, or can I take it in my tree for the
> next merge window?

Hm, I don't think the patch is really needed though; see my other mail. :)

Christian