lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Feb]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [uml-devel] [Patch] uml: fix a link error
    On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 09:32:51PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
    > On Wed, 4 Feb 2009, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
    > > On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Shane Hathaway wrote:
    > > > Daolong Wang wrote:
    > > > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:21 PM, Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com> wrote:
    > > > >> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 02:23:46PM +0800, Daolong Wang wrote:
    > > > >>> I can confirm this link error.
    > > > >> In what environment? I see no problems here.
    > > >
    > > > I can also confirm this link error. The problem occurs when compiling
    > > > either 2.6.28.1 or 2.6.27.12; I didn't try anything earlier. The patch
    > > > suggested at this beginning of this thread did solve the link problem
    > > > and the resulting kernel ran for several hours. However, I think the
    > > > patch is still probably incorrect.
    > > >
    > > > I'm going to repost what I said in another message I sent today, this
    > > > time with a wider audience:
    > > >
    > > > The problem is that the name "sigprocmask" is getting renamed to
    > > > "kernel_sigprocmask" by a compiler directive in arch/um/Makefile, then
    > > > that name gets mangled into "sys_kernel_sigprocmask" by the
    > > > SYSCALL_DEFINE3(sigprocmask, ...) macro in kernel/signal.c.
    > > >
    > > > So, instead of the patch suggested earlier, I added the following line
    > > > to arch/um/sys-i386/sys_call_table.S:
    > > >
    > > > #define sys_sigprocmask sys_kernel_sigprocmask
    > > >
    > > > This made it compile and link correctly. Look at the symbols generated
    > > > by the compile of signal.c to see what I mean:
    > > >
    > > > # nm kernel/signal.o | grep sigprocmask
    > > > 0000008f r __kstrtab_kernel_sigprocmask
    > > > 00000040 r __ksymtab_kernel_sigprocmask
    > > > 00001ea6 T kernel_sigprocmask
    > > > 00002d67 T sys_kernel_sigprocmask
    > > > 00001faf T sys_rt_sigprocmask
    > > >
    > > > Unfortunately, it's a mystery to me that others haven't run into this
    > > > before. My host environment is RHEL 4 inside some kind of chroot.
    > >
    > > I've just started seeing this problem with some 2.6.29-rc3 kernel...
    > >
    > > Before, I did not have this problem with various 2.6.28-rc8 and 2.6.29-rc1
    > > kernels (and several older versions I don't remember).
    > >
    > > Given 2.6.29-rc1 works for me and 2.6.28.1 fails for you, I'm inclined to
    > > believe 2.6.28 is OK. I'll give it a try...
    > >
    > > BTW, I'm using CentOS 5.2.
    >
    > Following up from home...
    >
    > Indeed, 2.6.28 works, 2.6.28.1 doesn't.
    >
    > According to git bisect, it got introduced by the system call security fixes
    > (CVE-2009-0029), more specifically by this part:
    >
    > | commit fe7c0d987fb2cce464d29eec9dfcca6296b5eed7
    > | Author: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
    > | Date: Wed Jan 14 14:14:06 2009 +0100
    > |
    > | System call wrappers part 04
    > |
    > | commit b290ebe2c46d01b742b948ce03f09e8a3efb9a92 upstream.
    > |
    > | Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
    > | Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
    > |
    > | --- a/kernel/signal.c
    > | +++ b/kernel/signal.c
    > | @@ -2425,8 +2424,8 @@ sys_sigpending(old_sigset_t __user *set)
    > | /* Some platforms have their own version with special arguments others
    > | support only sys_rt_sigprocmask. */
    > |
    > | -asmlinkage long
    > | -sys_sigprocmask(int how, old_sigset_t __user *set, old_sigset_t __user *oset)
    > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    > | +SYSCALL_DEFINE3(sigprocmask, int, how, old_sigset_t __user *, set,
    > ^^^^^^^^^^^
    > | + old_sigset_t __user *, oset)
    > | {
    > | int error;
    > | old_sigset_t old_set, new_set;
    >
    > Hence it allows sigprocmask to be redefined to kernel_sigprocmask by the C
    > preprocessor...
    >
    > This got backported to 2.6.27.12 as well, confusing people who ran post-2.6.27
    > development kernels and never noticed the problem (including Jeff and me)...
    >
    > It showed up in a "development" kernel in 2.6.29-rc2 only.

    Is there a real patch in Linus's tree for this fix that I can add to the
    .27 and .28 -stable kernel trees?

    thanks,

    greg k-h


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-02-04 21:45    [W:2.809 / U:0.068 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site