linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][CFT] signal handling fixes

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 23 Sep 2021 16:45:07 +0200
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
        Greg Ungerer <gerg@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][CFT] signal handling fixes

On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 7:18 PM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>         Back in 2012 or so I'd found a bunch of fun issues with multiple
> pending signals on a lot of architectures.  m68k looked scarier than
> usual (due to the combination of variable-sized exception frames with the
> way kernel stack pointer is handled by the hardware), but I'd convinced
> myself that it had been correct.
>
>         Unfortunately, I was wrong - handling of multiple pending signals
> does *not* work correctly there.

[...]

Thank you, queuing in the m68k branch as fixes.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds