On 08/21, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>
> Quoting Oleg Nesterov ([email protected]):
> > @@ -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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
