From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7EF5C433EF for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 20:00:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231366AbhKWUEA (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Nov 2021 15:04:00 -0500 Received: from meesny.iki.fi ([195.140.195.201]:47330 "EHLO meesny.iki.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239128AbhKWUD7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Nov 2021 15:03:59 -0500 Received: from [172.16.24.131] (73-55.dynamonet.fi [85.134.55.73]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tmb@iki.fi) by meesny.iki.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 74CBF202B7; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 22:00:49 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iki.fi; s=meesny; t=1637697649; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=J+RXdYW3xCoqWF3NRZa/mlI03JmcrTDV1YQOcG/1yxQ=; b=QVOuBuCfGkUAncpsZ10hi0IteI/bYTh9UeGul3OZ7c3iH1YqYkQ0iJVO7PtnI/QlTlVlut 1hPK2oRrhdkLUidqlMV50fATdpiNbm7XYZmnKvQrdvtwCvIU37GsIXO1iEd29gGTOaTsV+ Kc8mVFI/EX80UXRaxF8y6sXmNnDIDqM= Message-ID: Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 22:00:49 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.3.2 Subject: Re: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] signal: Don't always set SA_IMMUTABLE for forced signals" failed to apply to 5.15-stable tree Content-Language: en-US To: ebiederm@xmission.com, Greg KH Cc: Thomas Backlund , keescook@chromium.org, khuey@kylehuey.com, me@kylehuey.com, oliver.sang@intel.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, stable@vger.kernel.org References: <163758427225348@kroah.com> <877dcyllom.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org> From: Thomas Backlund In-Reply-To: <877dcyllom.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=tmb@iki.fi smtp.mailfrom=tmb@iki.fi ARC-Seal: i=1; s=meesny; d=iki.fi; t=1637697649; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=idSQ/K8V/AgG7zhmOmgtEW6BEe19OkxukM0UqCsZ8IQnTbqgvCvlYyDcrabCCBSLvMFwIN Qhygy3mjC5MxWw+Ulh4Kcxl5n9jLWa7+smFsYzSE6Z3ISzNDWERhkbaMOCxoyaujAbkWjX 6/nu1UeQkHDL7yaGiVCHJ1/v3ZXSOZY= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iki.fi; s=meesny; t=1637697649; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=J+RXdYW3xCoqWF3NRZa/mlI03JmcrTDV1YQOcG/1yxQ=; b=RJwWuDYvHPqvdmu7xoenKoE1kvjBTAougq7DkJ4FZM44STals0COQYxqXORvDBN5Q7rUh0 FnuWFwEGZxTBQ6F7/8fEJ9+5aywrgLVrAB2el+QBJwQoUX0cBUN+D8flwAYwGStKRyXAzH XamxBDZ34XJOTQdfobf4w44fXgGl1vA= Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org Den 2021-11-23 kl. 21:24, skrev ebiederm@xmission.com: > Greg KH writes: > >> On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 07:29:43PM +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote: >>> Den 2021-11-22 kl. 14:31, skrev gregkh@linuxfoundation.org: >>>> The patch below does not apply to the 5.15-stable tree. >>>> If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm >>>> tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit >>>> id to . >>>> >>>> thanks, >>>> >>>> greg k-h >>> >>> It will apply if you add this one first: >>> >>> From 26d5badbccddcc063dc5174a2baffd13a23322aa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:43:59 -0500 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal: Implement force_fatal_sig >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> and if the other patch for signal that has similar description should land >>> in 5.15: >>> >>> From fcb116bc43c8c37c052530ead79872f8b2615711 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 14:23:21 -0600 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal: Replace force_fatal_sig with force_exit_sig when in >>> doubt >>> >>> >>> >>> then the list is looks something like: >>> >>> >>> From 941edc5bf174b67f94db19817cbeab0a93e0c32a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:44:00 -0500 >>> Subject: [PATCH] exit/syscall_user_dispatch: Send ordinary signals on >>> failure >>> >>> From 83a1f27ad773b1d8f0460d3a676114c7651918cc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:43:53 -0500 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal/powerpc: On swapcontext failure force SIGSEGV >>> >>> From 9bc508cf0791c8e5a37696de1a046d746fcbd9d8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:43:57 -0500 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal/s390: Use force_sigsegv in default_trap_handler >>> >>> From c317d306d55079525c9610267fdaf3a8a6d2f08b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:44:01 -0500 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal/sparc32: Exit with a fatal signal when >>> try_to_clear_window_buffer fails >>> >>> From 086ec444f86660e103de8945d0dcae9b67132ac9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:44:02 -0500 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal/sparc32: In setup_rt_frame and setup_fram use >>> force_fatal_sig >>> >>> From 1fbd60df8a852d9c55de8cd3621899cf4c72a5b7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:43:56 -0500 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal/vm86_32: Properly send SIGSEGV when the vm86 state >>> cannot be saved. >>> >>> From 695dd0d634df8903e5ead8aa08d326f63b23368a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:44:03 -0500 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal/x86: In emulate_vsyscall force a signal instead of >>> calling do_exit >>> >>> From 26d5badbccddcc063dc5174a2baffd13a23322aa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:43:59 -0500 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal: Implement force_fatal_sig >>> >>> From e21294a7aaae32c5d7154b187113a04db5852e37 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 10:50:57 -0500 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal: Replace force_sigsegv(SIGSEGV) with >>> force_fatal_sig(SIGSEGV) >>> >>> From e349d945fac76bddc78ae1cb92a0145b427a87ce Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 11:11:13 -0600 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal: Don't always set SA_IMMUTABLE for forced signals >>> >>> From fcb116bc43c8c37c052530ead79872f8b2615711 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >>> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 14:23:21 -0600 >>> Subject: [PATCH] signal: Replace force_fatal_sig with force_exit_sig when in >>> doubt >>> >>> >>> >>> Applying them in listed order on top of 5.14.4 and builds/runs on i586, >>> x86_64, armv7hl, aarch64 >> That series list is crazy, let me go try it and see what blows up! :) > Maybe I am wrong but I think "Don't always set SA_IMMUTABLE for forced > signals" will apply if you drop the hunk modifying force_fatal_sig. > Then you don't need to backport all of the cleanups just the fix. > > I will take a quick look and verify that. that's why i wrote: "if the other patch for signal that has similar description should land" (meaning "signal: Replace force_fatal_sig with force_exit_sig when in doubt") as thats the one needing the whole patch series... since going by patch descriptions for: "signal: Don't always set SA_IMMUTABLE for forced signals" "signal: Replace force_fatal_sig with force_exit_sig when in doubt" both has the info: "Unfortunately this broke debuggers[1][2] which reasonably expect to be able to trap synchronous SIGTRAP and SIGSEGV even when the target process is not configured to handle those signals." and the second even has: "This avoids userspace regressions as older kernels exited with do_exit which debuggers also can not intercept." or is the patch description on the second patch somewhat misleading ? -- Thomas