Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2023 14:53:32 +0100 From: Markus Wichmann <nullplan@....net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: synccall patches Am Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 09:00:33AM -0400 schrieb Rich Felker: > On the other hand, the thing you're worried about, the original value > of c.ret being passed to __syscall_ret, can't happen. If it was > initially positive on entry to do_setxid, a syscall is made and the > return value is stored into c.ret. > But if the tkill fails in __synccall, do_setxid() will never be called at all (that's what line 87 in synccall.c does). So the original value will remain. Perhaps __synccall should return failure in that case, after doing everything else. Then the logic could otherwise remain untouched, and __setxid could respond appropriately to the failure itself. Ciao, Markus
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.