From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1CCkgn-0004D6-VT for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:04:37 -0700 Received: from [12.177.129.25] (helo=ccure.user-mode-linux.org) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.41) id 1CCkgl-0003uN-QK for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:04:37 -0700 Message-Id: <200409292110.i8TLAeLR003432@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> Subject: Re: [uml-devel] Minor problems with interrupted systemcalls In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 29 Sep 2004 18:34:14 +0200." <8B6FF516CBA0194AB0996705076B02520F7C3D@ABGEX01E.abg.fsc.net> References: <8B6FF516CBA0194AB0996705076B02520F7C3D@ABGEX01E.abg.fsc.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Jeff Dike Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:10:40 -0400 To: "Stroesser, Bodo" Cc: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, BlaisorBlade Bodo.Stroesser@fujitsu-siemens.com said: > A small piece of code regarding SA_ONESHOT should be removed only. In > 2.6.9 this is done in get_signal_to_deliver(), and since > get_signal_to_deliver() writes a copy of the corresponding k_sigaction > into caller's ka_copy, it is a real NOOP. Yup, I was looking at that when I was pulling your patch apart, but decided to leave it alone for now. I just got rid of it. On the subject of escaping from UML, I have a exploit lying around from when I fixed the bug in tt mode, and it fails to escape in skas mode. I'm not sure why, though. I'm also uncertain about sysenter. It should go through the same ptrace path as int 0x80, and be intercepted in the same way, and a quick look at entry.S indicates that it does. The remaining question is whether syscall restarting works the same, and I don't see any x86 code looking at the syscall instruction before deciding to subtract 2 bytes from eip. Jeff ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel