On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 01:44:04PM +0200, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 12:34:03PM +0200, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > > The problem is really that SI_SIGIO is negative, but it should be positive
> > > > to make SI_FROMUSER return false on it.
> > > >
> > > > Changing it would unfortunately break binary compatibility. This patch
> > >
> > > Why ?
> >
> > If a program checks info->si_code for incoming signals.
>
> ok now what does the value the kernel passes have to do with the value we
> write on the user stack - at the moment we blindly copy but we could just
> use a tiny lookup table to 'dekernelize' the ID. In fact if you picked a bitflag
> you could just mask it
That would not help much, the user could just still set the non mapped
value in sigqueueinfo() [which would need to be forbidden to avoid
users faking kernel signals, which my patch exactly does]
-Andi
--
This is like TV. I don't like TV.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
