linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] signal: Update send_signal

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250411111752.GB5322@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 13:17:53 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: jiang.kun2@....com.cn, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, frederic@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
	brauner@...nel.org, joel.granados@...nel.org,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fan.yu9@....com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal: Update send_signal_locked in relevant comments

On 04/11, jiang.kun2@....com.cn wrote:
>
> --- a/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -2252,7 +2252,7 @@ bool do_notify_parent(struct task_struct *tsk, int sig)
>  			sig = 0;
>  	}
>  	/*
> -	 * Send with __send_signal as si_pid and si_uid are in the
> +	 * Send with __send_signal_locked as si_pid and si_uid are in the
>  	 * parent's namespaces.

Thanks, but I think that today this comment looks confusing either way.
It was added by 61e713bdca3678 along with this

	-               __group_send_sig_info(sig, &info, tsk->parent);
	+               __send_signal(sig, &info, tsk->parent, PIDTYPE_TGID, false);

change.

To me this comment looks outdated, perhaps it would be better to simply
remove it?

Or it should be updated to explain that we use __send_signal_locked()
instead of send_signal_locked() because the latter can wrongly change
si_pid/si_uid...

Oleg.