Allow rt_sigqueueinfo and rt_tgsigqueueinfo to use si_code == SI_ASYNCIO
PATCH 1/1 Allow rt_sigqueueinfo and rt_tgsigqueueinfo to use si_code == SI_ASYNCIO
From: Roland Dreier <[email protected]>
Commit da48524eb206 ("Prevent rt_sigqueueinfo and rt_tgsigqueueinfo from spoofing the signal code") made the check on si_code too strict:
glibc's aio implementation wants to queue signals with SI_ASYNCIO, and indeed glibc's tst-aio4 fails with the patched kernel.
Fix this by loosening the new check to allow SI_ASYNCIO as well.
--- kernel/signal.c | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
kernel/signal.c +2 -2
@@ -2437,7 +2437,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(rt_sigqueueinfo, pid_t, pid, int, sig,/* Not even root can pretend to send signals from the kernel. * Nor can they impersonate a kill()/tgkill(), which adds source info. */ -if (info.si_code !=SI_QUEUE ) { +if (info.si_code !=SI_QUEUE && info.si_code !=SI_ASYNCIO ) {/* We used to allow any < 0 si_code */ WARN_ON_ONCE (info.si_code <0 );return -EPERM ;
@@ -2457,7 +2457,7 @@ long do_rt_tgsigqueueinfo(pid_t tgid, pid_t pid, int sig, siginfo_t *info)/* Not even root can pretend to send signals from the kernel. * Nor can they impersonate a kill()/tgkill(), which adds source info. */ -if (info->si_code !=SI_QUEUE ) { +if (info->si_code !=SI_QUEUE && info->si_code !=SI_ASYNCIO ) {/* We used to allow any < 0 si_code */ WARN_ON_ONCE (info->si_code <0 );return -EPERM ;
Quoted 7 lines · Roland Dreier
Commit
da48524eb206("Preventrt_sigqueueinfoandrt_tgsigqueueinfofrom spoofing the signal code") made the check onsi_codetoo strict:
glibc's aio implementation wants to queue signals withSI_ASYNCIO, and indeed glibc's tst-aio4 fails with the patched kernel.Fix this by loosening the new check to allow
SI_ASYNCIOas well.
Heh.
kernel/signal.c SYSCALL_DEFINE3(rt_sigqueueinfo, pid_t, pid, int, sig, · line 2440
Quoted 8 lines
kernel/signal.c +1
-1@@ -2437,7 +2437,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(rt_sigqueueinfo, pid_t, pid, int, sig,/* Not even root can pretend to send signals from the kernel. * Nor can they impersonate a kill()/tgkill(), which adds source info. */ -if (info.si_code !=SI_QUEUE ) { +if (info.si_code !=SI_QUEUE && info.si_code !=SI_ASYNCIO ) {
I am starting to think that "plan B" was better.
if (info.si_code >= 0 || info.si_code == SI_TKILL) return -EPERM;
Although we should probably keep WARN_ON_ONCE() anyway.
Oleg.
Quoted 4 lines · Oleg Nesterov
I am starting to think that "plan B" was better.
if (info.si_code >= 0 || info.si_code ==
SI_TKILL) return-EPERM;
Indeed. Grepping further in glibc finds sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/aio_sigqueue.c:
/* We must pass the information about the data in a siginfo_t
value. */
info.si_signo = timer->event.sigev_signo;
info.si_code = SI_TIMER;
info.si_pid = timer->creator_pid;
info.si_uid = getuid ();
info.si_value = timer->event.sigev_value;
INLINE_SYSCALL (rt_sigqueueinfo, 3, info.si_pid, info.si_signo, &info);and sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/gai_sigqueue.c:
/* We must pass the information about the data in a siginfo_t value. */ info.si_signo = sig; info.si_code = SI_ASYNCNL; info.si_pid = caller_pid; info.si_uid = __getuid (); info.si_value = val;
return INLINE_SYSCALL (rt_sigqueueinfo, 3, info.si_pid,
sig, __ptrvalue (&info));
where SI_ASYNCNL is -60, which the kernel doesn't know about.
Updated patch coming in a minute.
Thanks,
Roland