[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v10 07/11] signal, x86: add SIGSYS info and make it synchronous.
On Thu, February 23, 2012 20:26, Will Drewry wrote:
> Seems like there's an argument for another return code,
> SECCOMP_RET_CORE, that resets/unblocks the SIGSYS handler since the
> existing TRAP and KILL options seem to cover the other paths (signal
> handler and do_exit).

What about making SECCOMP_RET_TRAP dump core/send SIGSYS if there is
no tracer with PTRACE_O_SECCOMP set? And perhaps go for a blockable
SIGSYS? That way you only have KILL, ERRNO and TRAP, with the last
one meaning deny, but giving someone else a chance to do something.
Or is that just confusing?

I don't think there should be too many return values, or else you
put too much runtime policy into the filters.

Sending SIGSYS is useful, but it's quite a bit less useful if user
space can't handle it in a signal handler, so I don't think it's
worth it to make a unblockable version.



 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-23 23:19    [W:0.061 / U:0.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site