linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] signal.7: Fix wrong mention of sigprocmask

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]

Message-ID: <ZmhL18D4rGeV_vnJ@finisterre.sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:06:31 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
Cc: alx@...nel.org, linux-man@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, mark.rutland@....com, ryan.roberts@....com,
	suzuki.poulose@....com, Anshuman.Khandual@....com,
	DeepakKumar.Mishra@....com, aneesh.kumar@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] signal.7: Fix wrong mention of sigprocmask

On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 02:38:23PM +0530, Dev Jain wrote:
> The handler is registered with sigaction(), not sigprocmask(). Even if the
> purpose of writing sigprocmask() here was to mention blocked signals, the
> statement currently concerns the "addition" of blocked signals; signals
> blocked through sigprocmask() would already be present in the thread
> context of blocked signals.

Reviewed-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)