From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>,
Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
arnd@arndb.de, dbueso@suse.de, axboe@kernel.dk,
dave@stgolabs.net, e@80x24.org, jbaron@akamai.com,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aio@kvack.org,
omar.kilani@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pselect/etc semantics
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 17:57:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190530155715.GH22536@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87woi8rt96.fsf@xmission.com>
On 05/30, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > Al, Linus, Eric, please help.
> >
> > The previous discussion was very confusing, we simply can not understand each
> > other.
> >
> > To me everything looks very simple and clear, but perhaps I missed something
> > obvious? Please correct me.
>
> If I have read this thread correctly the core issue is that ther is a
> program that used to work and that fails now. The question is why.
I didn't even try to investigate, I wasn't cc'ed initially and I then I had
enough confusion when I started to look at the patch.
However, 854a6ed56839a40f6 obviously introduced the user-visible change so
I am not surprised it breaks something. And yes, personally I think this
change is not right.
> Which means I believe we have a semantically valid change in behavior
> that is causing a regression.
See below,
> void restore_user_sigmask(const void __user *usigmask, sigset_t *sigsaved)
> {
>
> if (!usigmask)
> return;
> /*
> * When signals are pending, do not restore them here.
> * Restoring sigmask here can lead to delivering signals that the above
> * syscalls are intended to block because of the sigmask passed in.
> */
> if (signal_pending(current)) {
> current->saved_sigmask = *sigsaved;
> set_restore_sigmask();
> return;
> }
>
> /*
> * This is needed because the fast syscall return path does not restore
> * saved_sigmask when signals are not pending.
> */
> set_current_blocked(sigsaved);
> }
>
> Which has been reported results in a return value of 0,
0 or success
> and a signal
> delivered, where previously that did not happen.
Yes.
And to me this doesn't look right. OK, OK, probably this is because I never
read the docs, only the source code in fs/select.c. But to me pselect() should
either return success/timeout or deliver a signal. Not both. Even if the signal
was already pending before pselect() was called.
To clarify, "a signal" means a signal which was blocked before pselect(sigmask)
and temporary unblocked in this syscall.
And even if this doesn't violate posix, I see no reason to change the historic
behaviour. And this regression probably means we can't ;)
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-30 15:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 95+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-22 3:21 [PATCH v2] signal: Adjust error codes according to restore_user_sigmask() Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-22 15:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-22 15:55 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-22 16:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-22 16:33 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-23 9:03 ` David Laight
2019-05-23 14:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-23 16:18 ` David Laight
2019-05-23 16:36 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-23 16:56 ` David Laight
2019-05-23 18:06 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-23 20:41 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-23 21:06 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-24 9:58 ` David Laight
2019-05-24 14:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-24 15:16 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-24 16:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-24 17:01 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-27 15:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-28 20:47 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-29 16:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-29 18:42 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-28 9:02 ` David Laight
2019-05-28 9:12 ` David Laight
2019-05-28 11:37 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-28 12:04 ` David Laight
2019-05-24 14:19 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-24 14:29 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-24 14:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-24 13:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-24 14:59 ` David Laight
2019-05-24 15:09 ` David Laight
2019-05-24 15:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-24 15:44 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-24 16:40 ` David Laight
2019-05-23 14:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-22 22:18 ` Chris Down
2019-05-22 22:52 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-29 16:11 ` pselect/etc semantics (Was: [PATCH v2] signal: Adjust error codes according to restore_user_sigmask()) Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-29 16:54 ` David Laight
2019-05-29 18:50 ` Eric Wong
2019-05-30 9:34 ` David Laight
2019-05-30 13:04 ` pselect/etc semantics Eric W. Biederman
2019-05-29 16:56 ` pselect/etc semantics (Was: [PATCH v2] signal: Adjust error codes according to restore_user_sigmask()) Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-29 18:26 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-29 22:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-05-30 1:54 ` pselect/etc semantics Eric W. Biederman
2019-05-30 18:28 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-05-30 14:40 ` pselect/etc semantics (Was: [PATCH v2] signal: Adjust error codes according to restore_user_sigmask()) Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-30 18:37 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-05-30 13:01 ` pselect/etc semantics Eric W. Biederman
2019-05-30 15:18 ` David Laight
2019-05-30 16:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-30 15:38 ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-05-30 15:48 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-30 16:59 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-05-30 16:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-05-30 17:20 ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-05-30 16:22 ` David Laight
2019-05-30 15:57 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2019-05-30 21:03 ` Eric Wong
2019-06-04 13:41 ` [PATCH] signal: remove the wrong signal_pending() check in restore_user_sigmask() Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-04 15:31 ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-06-04 15:57 ` David Laight
2019-06-04 16:37 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-04 18:14 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-06-04 18:35 ` Eric Wong
2019-06-04 21:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-06-04 22:24 ` Eric Wong
2019-06-04 23:51 ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-06-05 9:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-05 8:56 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-05 9:02 ` David Laight
2019-06-05 9:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-05 9:58 ` David Laight
2019-06-05 15:58 ` [PATCH -mm 0/1] signal: simplify set_user_sigmask/restore_user_sigmask Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-05 15:58 ` [PATCH -mm 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-06 0:14 ` kbuild test robot
2019-06-06 1:06 ` kbuild test robot
2019-06-06 7:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-06 7:30 ` Sedat Dilek
2019-06-05 17:24 ` [PATCH -mm 0/1] " Linus Torvalds
2019-06-06 9:05 ` David Laight
2019-06-06 11:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-06 11:29 ` David Laight
2019-06-06 12:41 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-06 13:23 ` David Laight
2019-06-06 10:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-06 11:32 ` [PATCH -mm V2 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-06 14:08 ` [PATCH 0/2] select: simplify the usage of restore_saved_sigmask_unless() Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-06 14:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] select: change do_poll() to return -ERESTARTNOHAND rather than -EINTR Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-07 18:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-06-06 14:09 ` [PATCH 2/2] select: shift restore_saved_sigmask_unless() into poll_select_copy_remaining() Oleg Nesterov
2019-06-07 21:39 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5]: Removing saved_sigmask Eric W. Biederman
2019-06-11 18:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190530155715.GH22536@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=deepa.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=e@80x24.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
--cc=linux-aio@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=omar.kilani@gmail.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).