On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 08:30:05PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > Er... So which tree should that go through? sparc or signal? There's
> > a similar microblaze patch and a few more of the "do_sigaltstack() takes
> > userland pointer" variety, so I can put together a pile in
> > signal.git#for-linus, but if you prefer that to go through sparc tree,
> > I'm fine with that...
>
> I'm happy to take it via my sparc tree, and I'll queue it up for
> -stable as well. Can you resend it to me with a proper commit message?
sparc64: not any error from do_sigaltstack() should fail rt_sigreturn()
If a signal handler is executed on altstack and another signal comes,
we will end up with rt_sigreturn() on return from the second handler
getting -EPERM from do_sigaltstack(). It's perfectly OK, since we
are not asking to change the settings; in fact, they couldn't have been
changed during the second handler execution exactly because we'd been
on altstack all along. 64bit sigreturn on sparc treats any error from
do_sigaltstack() as "SIGSEGV now"; we need to switch to the same semantics
we are using on other architectures.
Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
---
diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/signal_64.c b/arch/sparc/kernel/signal_64.c
index 867de2f..689e1ba 100644
--- a/arch/sparc/kernel/signal_64.c
+++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/signal_64.c
@@ -295,9 +295,7 @@ void do_rt_sigreturn(struct pt_regs *regs)
err |= restore_fpu_state(regs, fpu_save);
err |= __copy_from_user(&set, &sf->mask, sizeof(sigset_t));
- err |= do_sigaltstack(&sf->stack, NULL, (unsigned long)sf);
-
- if (err)
+ if (err || do_sigaltstack(&sf->stack, NULL, (unsigned long)sf) ==
-EFAULT)
goto segv;
err |= __get_user(rwin_save, &sf->rwin_save);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
