Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1318020

Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend()

Show all headers | View raw

On 01/26, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> > A random wakeup can get us out of sigsuspend() without TIF_SIGPENDING
> > being set.
> >
> > Avoid that by making sure we were signaled, like sys_pause() does.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/signal.c |    6 ++++--
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
> > index 5da9180..3256c7e 100644
> > --- a/kernel/signal.c
> > +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> > @@ -3528,8 +3528,10 @@ static int sigsuspend(sigset_t *set)
> >  	current->saved_sigmask = current->blocked;
> >  	set_current_blocked(set);
> >
> > -	__set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> > -	schedule();
> > +	while (!signal_pending(current)) {
> > +		__set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> > +		schedule();
> > +	}
> >  	set_restore_sigmask();
> >  	return -ERESTARTNOHAND;
> >  }
>
> So this does not appear to be anything new, right?
>
> I agree with the fix, but I'm somewhat worried about the potential ABI impact:
> does anything exist out there that has learned to rely on spurious returns from
> SyS_sigsuspend() or SyS_rt_sigsuspend() system calls?

Unlikely. We can even forget about set_restore_sigmask/TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK and
WARN_ON(). We are going to return -ERESTARTNOHAND, this assumes that TIF_SIGPENDING
must be set and thus do_signal() will be called, userspace should never see this
error code. This is even documented in errno.h.

Oleg.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com> - 2016-01-25 17:00 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2016-01-25 20:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-25 20:40 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> - 2016-01-25 22:40 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2016-01-26 22:20 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-27 09:50 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2016-01-27 17:50 +0100
          Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-27 19:00 +0100
          Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> - 2016-01-27 19:40 +0100
            Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2016-01-27 22:10 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com> - 2016-01-27 18:30 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-01-26 07:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2016-01-26 16:10 +0100

csiph-web