Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1318399
| From | Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] signals: work around random wakeups in sigsuspend() |
| Date | 2016-01-26 22:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qVjbR-1GJ-29@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qURIG-68y-83@gated-at.bofh.it> <qUX1F-1E8-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 01/25, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:21:46 -0500 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. > > What we're lacking here is any description of the end-user-visible > effects of the bug. The warning in dmesg and -ERESTARTNOHAND which we should never return to user space, although I bet nobody checks the error code returned by sigsuspend(). Plus, of course, sys_sigsuspend() can return while it should not. > Enough for people to be able to decide (and to > recognize!) whether their kernel needs this patch.</stdrefrain> I don't think this problem is really serious, plus it is very unlikely. The spurious return from sigsuspend() should not really hurt. And, ironically, there is another more serious "reverse" problem ;) sigsuspend() orany other user of -ERESTARTNOHAND can "miss" the signal, in a sense that the kernel can wrongly restart this syscall after return from signal handler. This is not trivial to fix.. Oleg.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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