[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220818163126.GA47319@zipoli.concurrent-rt.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 12:31:26 -0400
From: Joe Korty <joe.korty@...current-rt.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: Mark Gross <markgross@...nel.org>,
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lgoncalv@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux RT users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RT BUG] Mismatched get_uid/free_uid usage in signals in some
rts (2nd try)
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 06:08:16PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2022-06-26 08:30:19 [-0400], Joe Korty wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> > Absent an actual test of your port of a99e09659e6c to 4.9-rt, I just
> > eye-verified that the change it makes to sigqueue_free_current looks
> > correct. In detail,
> >
> > matches the same change the Linus patch makes to __sigqueue_free (ie,
> > to the routine that sigqueue_free_current is a copy of).
> >
> > That the new variable 'up', in sigqueue_free_current, is being used
> > in the patch (some variants of this fix do not have 'up'), and that
> > variable is present in 4.9's version of sigqueue_free_current.
> >
> > That atomic_dec_and_test, rather than the refcounting version of that
> > some function, is being used (some versions of this patch are refcounted
> > instead).
>
> What is the status here? Is this still needed?
Hi Sebastian,
I just verified that 4.9.319-rt195 has this fix.
Regards,
Joe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists