Re: [RFC,PATCH] fix /sbin/init signal handling

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>]

On 08/21, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>
> Quoting Oleg Nesterov (oleg@tv-sign.ru):
> > @@ -1841,14 +1865,6 @@ relock:
> >  		if (sig_kernel_ignore(signr)) /* Default is nothing. */
> >  			continue;
> > 
> > -		/*
> > -		 * Init of a pid space gets no signals it doesn't want from
> > -		 * within that pid space. It can of course get signals from
> > -		 * its parent pid space.
> > -		 */
> > -		if (current == child_reaper(current))
> > -			continue;
> > -
> 
> Ok, so the idea is that this will now be caught when the signal is sent,
> using sig_ignored(), (i.e at send_sigqueue, send_group_sigqueue,
> specific_send_sig_info, and __group_send_sig_info) and so doesn't need
> to be checked here?

Yes.

> I was hoping that meant that sig_init_ignore() would always be called
> with current as the sending process, but I guess that's not the case?

Usually current == sender, but if the signal was sent from interrupt
context, current is some random process.

> At least in get_signal_to_deliver() we might resend a signal, though
> I guess we assume the signal comes from current->parent, so maybe we
> can pass that as an argument...

get_signal_to_deliver() might resend a signal, but only when current is
ptraced. In that case the signal will be delivered even if we are init,
no problem. (except that ptracing of sub-namespace init is problem by
itself).

Thanks for looking at this!

Oleg.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/