[lkml]   [2008]   [Dec]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 4/6][v3] Define siginfo_from_ancestor_ns()
Oleg Nesterov <> writes:

>> I was going through the ->si_pid assignments to try and fix them at
>> source (like the mqueue patch I sent last week).
> OK.

Note. When a signal goes to a process group (or similar) we can't fix
si_pid at the source. We have to fix it when only a single destination
process is known. It doesn't mean that fixing it at the source
is hopeless but...

>> The two cases that don't fit the model are sys_kill() and sys_tkill().
>> For that I was hoping we could use siginfo_from_user() again. i.e
>> if (siginfo_from_user())
>> masquerade_si_pid()
>> in the default: case of send_signal(). To be safe, masquerade_si_pid()
>> could do it only iff si_code is either SI_USER or SI_TKILL.
>> IOW, with some tweaks, I am trying to see if we can use siginfo_from_user()
>> in place of the SIG_FROM_USER.
> sys_rt_sigqueueinfo().
> But, perhaps we can just ignore the problems with sigqueueinfo() (and
> document them).

Yes. I don't think si_pid is valid in that case anyway. It is the
kernel signals where si_pid is a reliable field that are important.


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-12-23 01:41    [W:0.046 / U:3.612 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site