From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Satoru Takeuchi <takeuchi_satoru@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] ptraced process waiting on syscall may return kernel internal errnos
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 08:35:27 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.98.0706060811470.4205@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070606105900.DE5E94D0592@magilla.localdomain>
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> [PATCH] Restrict clearing TIF_SIGPENDING
>
> This patch should get a few birds. It prevents sigaction calls from
> clearing TIF_SIGPENDING in other threads, which could leak -ERESTART*.
> It fixes ptrace_stop not to clear it, which done at the syscall exit
> stop could leak -ERESTART*. It probably removes the harm from
> signalfd, at least assuming it never calls dequeue_signal on kernel
> threads that might have used block_all_signals.
Ok, this one is more complex than my suggested one-liner, but seems to fix
another bug. And it's logic in dequeue_signal() is a bit prettier than
Ben's (otherwise somewhat similar) patch.
HOWEVER: I'm still a bit worried about the fact that we have about ~180
calls to "recalc_sigpending()" around the kernel, and I'm not AT ALL sure
that they are all supposed to possibly clear the TIF_SIGPENDING flag. The
fact that we had basically two independent bugs in this area really makes
me more convinced that we probably should clear TIF_SIGPENDING in the only
path that really matters, namely the one that _depends_ on it being right
(the "do_signal()" path).
So I think that the *right* place to clear TIF_SIGPENDING is actually in
"get_signal_to_deliver()", because that function is called _only_ by the
actual per-architecture "I'm going to deliver a signal now".
(Oh, and we do need to handle it in the "notifier()" case too - ugly hack
for DRM).
So how does *this* patch look? It:
- totally removes the "clear_tsk_thread_flag()" from the signal pending
recalculations (ie now both "recalc_sigpending()" _and_
"recalc_sigpending_tsk()" will ever only _set_ that bit)
- in get_signal_to_deliver(), it adds a
if (!recalc_sigpending_tsk(current))
d_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING);
at the end.
- it removes the "recalc_sigpending_tsk()" from dequeue_signal(), since
that can never clear the signal any more.
So now we should do "recalc_sigpending()" only when signals may be *added*
(where messing with the "blocked" mask obviously is a form of adding
signals, and possibly the most common reason for having to recalculate the
sigpending mask).
Comments? This patch is _entirely_ and utterly untested, so I'm only
saying that this "feels" safer and more correct to me.
Linus
---
kernel/signal.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
index acdfc05..82b3c1a 100644
--- a/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/kernel/signal.c
@@ -105,7 +105,6 @@ static int recalc_sigpending_tsk(struct task_struct *t)
set_tsk_thread_flag(t, TIF_SIGPENDING);
return 1;
}
- clear_tsk_thread_flag(t, TIF_SIGPENDING);
return 0;
}
@@ -385,7 +384,6 @@ int dequeue_signal(struct task_struct *tsk, sigset_t *mask, siginfo_t *info)
}
}
}
- recalc_sigpending_tsk(tsk);
if (signr && unlikely(sig_kernel_stop(signr))) {
/*
* Set a marker that we have dequeued a stop signal. Our
@@ -1859,6 +1857,8 @@ relock:
do_group_exit(signr);
/* NOTREACHED */
}
+ if (!recalc_sigpending_tsk(current))
+ clear_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING);
spin_unlock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock);
return signr;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-06 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-06 5:47 Satoru Takeuchi
2007-06-06 10:59 ` Roland McGrath
2007-06-06 15:35 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-06-06 23:07 ` Paul Mackerras
2007-06-07 3:25 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-06-07 3:27 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-06-07 11:33 ` Satoru Takeuchi
2007-06-07 15:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-07 22:24 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-06-08 3:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-08 5:30 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-06-11 22:16 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-06-08 3:07 ` Satoru Takeuchi
2007-06-13 22:06 ` Roland McGrath
2007-06-07 3:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-06-13 15:15 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-06-13 22:36 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-06-13 23:01 ` Roland McGrath
2007-06-13 23:18 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-06-14 0:02 ` Roland McGrath
2007-06-13 22:53 ` Roland McGrath
2007-06-14 12:26 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-06-14 12:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-06-14 23:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-06-15 11:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-06-15 21:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-06-15 0:06 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
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=alpine.LFD.0.98.0706060811470.4205@woody.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=takeuchi_satoru@jp.fujitsu.com \
/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®