mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
To: shuah@kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mark.rutland@arm.com,
	ryan.roberts@arm.com, broonie@kernel.org, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
	Anshuman.Khandual@arm.com, DeepakKumar.Mishra@arm.com,
	aneesh.kumar@kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Add test to distinguish between thread's signal mask and ucontext_t
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 15:14:16 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4d5758b8-b1ef-4c6d-8fda-2a7c2d48d975@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240627035215.1527279-1-dev.jain@arm.com>


On 6/27/24 09:22, Dev Jain wrote:
> This patch series is motivated by the following observation:
>
> Raise a signal, jump to signal handler. The ucontext_t structure dumped
> by kernel to userspace has a uc_sigmask field having the mask of blocked
> signals. If you run a fresh minimalistic program doing this, this field
> is empty, even if you block some signals while registering the handler
> with sigaction().
>
> Here is what the man-pages have to say:
>
> sigaction(2): "sa_mask specifies a mask of signals which should be blocked
> (i.e., added to the signal mask of the thread in which the signal handler
> is invoked) during execution of the signal handler. In addition, the
> signal which triggered the handler will be blocked, unless the SA_NODEFER
> flag is used."
>
> signal(7): Under "Execution of signal handlers", (1.3) implies:
>
> "The thread's current signal mask is accessible via the ucontext_t
> object that is pointed to by the third argument of the signal handler."
>
> But, (1.4) states:
>
> "Any signals specified in act->sa_mask when registering the handler with
> sigprocmask(2) are added to the thread's signal mask.  The signal being
> delivered is also added to the signal mask, unless SA_NODEFER was
> specified when registering the handler.  These signals are thus blocked
> while the handler executes."
>
> There clearly is no distinction being made in the man pages between
> "Thread's signal mask" and ucontext_t; this logically should imply
> that a signal blocked by populating struct sigaction should be visible
> in ucontext_t.
>
> Here is what the kernel code does (for Aarch64):
>
> do_signal() -> handle_signal() -> sigmask_to_save(), which returns
> &current->blocked, is passed to setup_rt_frame() -> setup_sigframe() ->
> __copy_to_user(). Hence, &current->blocked is copied to ucontext_t
> exposed to userspace. Returning back to handle_signal(),
> signal_setup_done() -> signal_delivered() -> sigorsets() and
> set_current_blocked() are responsible for using information from
> struct ksignal ksig, which was populated through the sigaction()
> system call in kernel/signal.c:
> copy_from_user(&new_sa.sa, act, sizeof(new_sa.sa)),
> to update &current->blocked; hence, the set of blocked signals for the
> current thread is updated AFTER the kernel dumps ucontext_t to
> userspace.
>
> Assuming that the above is indeed the intended behaviour, because it
> semantically makes sense, since the signals blocked using sigaction()
> remain blocked only till the execution of the handler, and not in the
> context present before jumping to the handler (but nothing can be
> confirmed from the man-pages), the series introduces a test for
> mangling with uc_sigmask. I will send a separate series to fix the
> man-pages.
>
> The proposed selftest has been tested out on Aarch32, Aarch64 and x86_64.
>
> v3->v4:
>   - Allocate sigsets as automatic variables to avoid malloc()
>
> v2->v3:
>   - ucontext describes current state -> ucontext describes interrupted context
>   - Add a comment for blockage of USR2 even after return from handler
>   - Describe blockage of signals in a better way
>
> v1->v2:
>   - Replace all occurrences of SIGPIPE with SIGSEGV
>   - Fixed a mismatch between code comment and ksft log
>   - Add a testcase: Raise the same signal again; it must not be queued
>   - Remove unneeded <assert.h>, <unistd.h>
>   - Give a detailed test description in the comments; also describe the
>     exact meaning of delivered and blocked
>   - Handle errors for all libc functions/syscalls
>   - Mention tests in Makefile and .gitignore in alphabetical order
>
> v1:
>   - https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240607122319.768640-1-dev.jain@arm.com/
>
> Dev Jain (2):
>    selftests: Rename sigaltstack to generic signal
>    selftests: Add a test mangling with uc_sigmask
>
>   tools/testing/selftests/Makefile              |   2 +-
>   .../{sigaltstack => signal}/.gitignore        |   3 +-
>   .../{sigaltstack => signal}/Makefile          |   3 +-
>   .../current_stack_pointer.h                   |   0
>   .../selftests/signal/mangle_uc_sigmask.c      | 186 ++++++++++++++++++
>   .../sas.c => signal/sigaltstack.c}            |   0
>   6 files changed, 191 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>   rename tools/testing/selftests/{sigaltstack => signal}/.gitignore (57%)
>   rename tools/testing/selftests/{sigaltstack => signal}/Makefile (53%)
>   rename tools/testing/selftests/{sigaltstack => signal}/current_stack_pointer.h (100%)
>   create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/signal/mangle_uc_sigmask.c
>   rename tools/testing/selftests/{sigaltstack/sas.c => signal/sigaltstack.c} (100%)

If everything is fine, can this patchset be pulled? Thanks.

>

      parent reply	other threads:[~2024-07-16  9:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-27  3:52 Dev Jain
2024-06-27  3:52 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] selftests: Rename sigaltstack to generic signal Dev Jain
2024-06-27  3:52 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] selftests: Add a test mangling with uc_sigmask Dev Jain
2024-06-27 16:20   ` Mark Brown
2024-06-30 15:18   ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-07-15 11:49     ` Dev Jain
2024-07-22 14:58       ` Shuah Khan
2024-07-23  4:30         ` Dev Jain
2024-07-23 15:55           ` Shuah Khan
2024-07-16  9:44 ` Dev Jain [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4d5758b8-b1ef-4c6d-8fda-2a7c2d48d975@arm.com \
    --to=dev.jain@arm.com \
    --cc=Anshuman.Khandual@arm.com \
    --cc=DeepakKumar.Mishra@arm.com \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®