[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YLkhV+lSqXlcfUc5@zn.tnic>
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 20:37:11 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Jiashuo Liang <liangjs@....edu.cn>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal/x86: Don't send SIGSEGV twice on SEGV_PKUERR
On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 04:52:03PM +0800, Jiashuo Liang wrote:
> Before this patch, the __bad_area_nosemaphore function calls both
> force_sig_pkuerr and force_sig_fault when handling SEGV_PKUERR. This does
> not cause problems because the second signal is filtered by the
> legacy_queue check in __send_signal.
I'm likely missing something but the first signal gets filtered by that
same legacy_queue() check too, no?
Because both calls end up in
force_sig_info_to_task(info, current);
with the info struct populated with:
info.si_signo = SIGSEGV;
info.si_errno = 0;
info.si_code = SEGV_PKUERR;
info.si_addr = addr;
info.si_pkey = pkey;
except the second call - force_sig_fault() - doesn't put pkey in
->si_pkey.
So what's up?
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists