Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:17:53 -0500 From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Scott Bauer <sbauer@....utah.edu>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kernel-hardening\@lists.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, "the arch\/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, wmealing@...hat.com, Abhiram Balasubramanian <abhiram@...utah.edu>, Scott Bauer <sbauer@...donthack.me> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] SROP Mitigation: Architecture independent code for signal cookies Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> writes: > On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Eric W. Biederman > <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote: >> >> I suspect we want this to be a per-mm attribute rather than a per-thread >> attribute. >> >> Otherwise you are breaking anything that uses a N-M threading model. >> Which I suspect means that this implementation choice breaks all go >> programs on linux. > > That sounds like a good point, but wouldn't it make more conceptual > sense to make it part of "struct sighand_struct" instead? > > That is also shared for threads. Good point. Given this is a signal handling feature struct sighand_struct is the natural place to put this. Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.