[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210325212733.GC32296@zn.tnic>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 22:27:33 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To: "Bae, Chang Seok" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"Cooper, Andrew" <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
"Gross, Jurgen" <jgross@...e.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"H. J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Carlos O'Donell <carlos@...hat.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
libc-alpha <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/6] x86/signal: Detect and prevent an alternate
signal stack overflow
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 09:11:56PM +0000, Bae, Chang Seok wrote:
> But if sigaltstack()’ed with the SS_AUTODISARM flag, both on_sig_stack() and
> sas_ss_flags() return 0 [1]. Then, segfault always here. v5 had the exact
> issue before [2].
Ah, there's that SS_AUTODISARM check above it which I missed, sorry.
I guess we can do a __on_sig_stack() helper or so which does the stack
check only without the SS_AUTODISARM. Just for readability's sake in
what is already a pretty messy function.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists