Re: [PATCH 1/2] signal: Don't always set SA_IMMUTABLE for forced signals

[Eric W. Biederman]

Kyle Huey <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 2:05 PM Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Recently to prevent issues with SECCOMP_RET_KILL and similar signals
>> being changed before they are delivered SA_IMMUTABLE was added.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> Update force_sig_to_task to support both the case when we can
>> allow the debugger to intercept and possibly ignore the
>> signal and the case when it is not safe to let userspace
>> known about the signal until the process has exited.
>
> s/known/know/

Fixed.


>> Reported-by: Kyle Huey <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAP045AoMY4xf8aC_4QU_-j7obuEPYgTcnQQP3Yxk=2X90jtpjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [2] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20211117150258.GB5403@xsang-OptiPlex-902
>
> This link doesn't work.

Shame.  I missed a trailing 0, but unfortunately that request did not go
to list that is archived on lore.  I will keep the link on the chance
the message winds up in a lore archive in the future.

Eric