[PATCH v2 1/2] signal: change force_sig_info_to_task() to call __send_signal_locked()

[PATCH v2 1/2] signal: change force_sig_info_to_task() to call __send_signal_locked()

[Oleg Nesterov]

force_sig_info_to_task() calls send_signal_locked() but this is pointless;
info is always valid and has_si_pid_and_uid(info) should never be true.
Forced signals do not carry si_pid/si_uid, not to mention that info.si_pid
overlaps with .si_addr/si_call_addr/etc.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
---
 kernel/signal.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
index 9924489c43a5..75e277e24b52 100644
--- a/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/kernel/signal.c
@@ -1317,7 +1317,7 @@ force_sig_info_to_task(struct kernel_siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t,
 	if (action->sa.sa_handler == SIG_DFL &&
 	    (!t->ptrace || (handler == HANDLER_EXIT)))
 		t->signal->flags &= ~SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE;
-	ret = send_signal_locked(sig, info, t, PIDTYPE_PID);
+	ret = __send_signal_locked(sig, info, t, PIDTYPE_PID, false);
 	/* This can happen if the signal was already pending and blocked */
 	if (!task_sigpending(t))
 		signal_wake_up(t, 0);
-- 
2.52.0

[PATCH v2 2/2] signal: prevent evasion of SA_IMMUTABLE signals

[Oleg Nesterov]

force_sig_info_to_task(HANDLER_EXIT) sets SA_IMMUTABLE to ensure a forced
fatal signal cannot be ignored or caught by userspace; it must always
terminate the target. However, if get_signal() dequeues another synchronous
signal first, and that signal has a handler and its sa_mask includes the
fatal SA_IMMUTABLE signal, the task can return to userspace and survive.

So dequeue_synchronous_signal() must always dequeue an SA_IMMUTABLE signal
first. But it relies on the SI_FROMKERNEL() check and picks the first one
it sees in pending->list, and thus we have the following problems:

- If the same signal was already pending and blocked, the new siginfo
  with .si_code > 0 will be lost.

  Change __send_signal_locked() to bypass the legacy_queue() check in
  this case.

- If force_sig_info_to_task() races with another synchronous/SI_FROMKERNEL
  signal, that signal can be picked first.

  Change __send_signal_locked() to add an SA_IMMUTABLE signal at the start
  of pending->list.

- SA_IMMUTABLE implies override_rlimit == true, but GFP_ATOMIC can fail
  anyway.

  Change __send_signal_locked() to escalate to SIGKILL in this (very
  unlikely) case.

  Not perfect and perhaps deserves WARN() or pr_warn_ratelimited(), but
  better than nothing.

However, unlike get_signal(), __send_signal_locked() can not rely on the
k_sigaction.sa.sa_flags & SA_IMMUTABLE check; another signal with the same
.si_signo can come before dequeue_synchronous_signal() dequeues the signal
sent by force(HANDLER_EXIT). Say, send_sig_perf() from task_work_run(),
and this signal is SI_FROMKERNEL() too.

So this patch adds 2 helpers, mark_si_immutable() and unmark_si_immutable()
for force_sig_info_to_task() and __send_signal_locked() to pass/check the
"immutable" state of siginfo sent by HANDLER_EXIT.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
---
 kernel/signal.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
index 75e277e24b52..5a5eeb04ac7a 100644
--- a/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/kernel/signal.c
@@ -1034,6 +1034,19 @@ static void complete_signal(int sig, struct task_struct *p, enum pid_type type)
 	return;
 }
 
+static inline void mark_si_immutable(struct kernel_siginfo *info)
+{
+	info->si_signo |= INT_MIN; /* sets MSB */
+}
+
+static inline bool unmark_si_immutable(struct kernel_siginfo *info)
+{
+	bool ret = !is_si_special(info) && (info->si_signo & INT_MIN);
+	if (ret)
+		info->si_signo &= ~INT_MIN;
+	return ret;
+}
+
 static inline bool legacy_queue(struct sigpending *signals, int sig)
 {
 	return (sig < SIGRTMIN) && sigismember(&signals->signal, sig);
@@ -1042,6 +1055,7 @@ static inline bool legacy_queue(struct sigpending *signals, int sig)
 static int __send_signal_locked(int sig, struct kernel_siginfo *info,
 				struct task_struct *t, enum pid_type type, bool force)
 {
+	bool immutable = unmark_si_immutable(info);
 	struct sigpending *pending;
 	struct sigqueue *q;
 	int override_rlimit;
@@ -1055,12 +1069,12 @@ static int __send_signal_locked(int sig, struct kernel_siginfo *info,
 
 	pending = (type != PIDTYPE_PID) ? &t->signal->shared_pending : &t->pending;
 	/*
-	 * Short-circuit ignored signals and support queuing
-	 * exactly one non-rt signal, so that we can get more
-	 * detailed information about the cause of the signal.
+	 * Queue exactly one non-rt signal so that we can get more
+	 * detailed information about the cause. But we must never
+	 * lose the siginfo for an SA_IMMUTABLE signal.
 	 */
 	result = TRACE_SIGNAL_ALREADY_PENDING;
-	if (legacy_queue(pending, sig))
+	if (legacy_queue(pending, sig) && !immutable)
 		goto ret;
 
 	result = TRACE_SIGNAL_DELIVERED;
@@ -1087,7 +1101,12 @@ static int __send_signal_locked(int sig, struct kernel_siginfo *info,
 	q = sigqueue_alloc(sig, t, GFP_ATOMIC, override_rlimit);
 
 	if (q) {
-		list_add_tail(&q->list, &pending->list);
+		/* Ensure dequeue_synchronous_signal() sees SA_IMMUTABLE first */
+		if (immutable)
+			list_add(&q->list, &pending->list);
+		else
+			list_add_tail(&q->list, &pending->list);
+
 		switch ((unsigned long) info) {
 		case (unsigned long) SEND_SIG_NOINFO:
 			clear_siginfo(&q->info);
@@ -1130,6 +1149,9 @@ static int __send_signal_locked(int sig, struct kernel_siginfo *info,
 		 * send the signal, but the *info bits are lost.
 		 */
 		result = TRACE_SIGNAL_LOSE_INFO;
+		/* The task must not escape SA_IMMUTABLE; escalate to SIGKILL */
+		if (immutable)
+			sig = SIGKILL;
 	}
 
 out_set:
@@ -1317,6 +1339,9 @@ force_sig_info_to_task(struct kernel_siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t,
 	if (action->sa.sa_handler == SIG_DFL &&
 	    (!t->ptrace || (handler == HANDLER_EXIT)))
 		t->signal->flags &= ~SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE;
+
+	if (handler == HANDLER_EXIT)
+		mark_si_immutable(info);
 	ret = __send_signal_locked(sig, info, t, PIDTYPE_PID, false);
 	/* This can happen if the signal was already pending and blocked */
 	if (!task_sigpending(t))
-- 
2.52.0

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] signal: change force_sig_info_to_task() to call __send_signal_locked()

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 05/02, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> force_sig_info_to_task() calls send_signal_locked() but this is pointless;
> info is always valid and has_si_pid_and_uid(info) should never be true.
> Forced signals do not carry si_pid/si_uid, not to mention that info.si_pid
> overlaps with .si_addr/si_call_addr/etc.

https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/afYGeHSWkLzXDlvC%40redhat.com

Sorry I could not reply earlier...

Oh, I didn't know people use force_sig() to send SIGKILL. I'd say they
should not, but this doesn't matter - they do.

So this needs yet another version. And I will read man grep 3 times.

Thanks again Sashiko.

Oleg.

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] signal: change force_sig_info_to_task() to call __send_signal_locked()

[Andrew Morton]

On Sat, 2 May 2026 16:13:12 +0200 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:

> force_sig_info_to_task() calls send_signal_locked() but this is pointless;
> info is always valid and has_si_pid_and_uid(info) should never be true.
> Forced signals do not carry si_pid/si_uid, not to mention that info.si_pid
> overlaps with .si_addr/si_call_addr/etc.

Thanks.  AI review said things:
	https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/afYGeHSWkLzXDlvC@redhat.com

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] signal: change force_sig_info_to_task() to call __send_signal_locked()

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 05/13, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2 May 2026 16:13:12 +0200 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > force_sig_info_to_task() calls send_signal_locked() but this is pointless;
> > info is always valid and has_si_pid_and_uid(info) should never be true.
> > Forced signals do not carry si_pid/si_uid, not to mention that info.si_pid
> > overlaps with .si_addr/si_call_addr/etc.
>
> Thanks.  AI review said things:
> 	https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/afYGeHSWkLzXDlvC@redhat.com

Yes, yes, thanks.

I have already replied,
https://lore.kernel.org/all/afhmbCryeyIz0E3V@redhat.com/

Sashiko is right. Again!!!

This needs another version.

Oleg.