From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13E543CBE91 for ; Fri, 3 Apr 2026 15:49:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775231353; cv=none; b=l6BhBYzR+OBnP0vG1CGqVpEnJ7TWxR3a87HAqlJ+jaTmN7GU/T1Xt0vOF3XhEHOzehzE8A2qDk5SCUmhjQ+kbtkEal4Qroxw0ZeQoR1/nygwJCoCKJtSlXSruEKoTnsgBsU9Yq/HUSf86d0w7FKD5dVGDX6Lhx4Iyq4JuZL2WWs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775231353; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Xtp9VrolvYquAxFAkCoLnRM4GzHZyjBWB6KXFa7HWpg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=do6V+GTd6mrajqedBjdUACenrtFqd1S/DovpvrFir80D8HSRJjr/ANTy2jc8y2kcKqlKIvFwUa7W89J30yncPOAdIcaO1CZWK5eq1xqNnpQiRcmK7Jgf14ism22Yu4LeqqEzBVDKcLRPRlI00p0OJKO9Ks9CUrRzvRUCcQZoeSU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=YuSWsX3h; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="YuSWsX3h" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1775231349; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Xtp9VrolvYquAxFAkCoLnRM4GzHZyjBWB6KXFa7HWpg=; b=YuSWsX3hTNz0QSkzS6/MRBSR9GejQ4rTm3P2O/jvtOmqIyEpjLR1Xx7xy8b61TVjU17FXB 2z1GQL4k3DF7rwUnMkRpxgbeysq/NF9ebKTU0vSz+15kET4PoRNd7RdOfK9kCVFQyEf29J QqdQ7QnYy/zfiaMEewkL0+1TB5vX/cg= Received: from mx-prod-mc-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-617-P1LrF6cWOFqY7MaB3Tn9tw-1; Fri, 03 Apr 2026 11:49:08 -0400 X-MC-Unique: P1LrF6cWOFqY7MaB3Tn9tw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: P1LrF6cWOFqY7MaB3Tn9tw_1775231347 Received: from mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.93]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF78219560B4; Fri, 3 Apr 2026 15:49:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fedora (unknown [10.44.36.60]) by mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BF1FF1800761; Fri, 3 Apr 2026 15:49:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fedora (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1000 oleg@redhat.com; Fri, 3 Apr 2026 17:49:06 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2026 17:48:59 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Kusaram Devineni Cc: Kees Cook , Andrew Morton , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Will Drewry , Max Ver , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ptrace: don't report syscall-exit if the tracee was killed by seccomp Message-ID: References: <6E69C3F0-0691-4115-AE36-F5E5743C942A@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.93 Thanks Kusaram! I was travelling, hope to send V2 this weekend. And write a more detailed reply. Just one note for now: On 04/03, Kusaram Devineni wrote: > > while tracing the same overall issue locally, we hit another path where the > forced fatal SIGSYS could be taken off the normal delivery path before > get_signal() handled it, in our case via signalfd. There, > force_sig_seccomp(..., true) marks SIGSYS as SA_IMMUTABLE via HANDLER_EXIT, > but signalfd could still dequeue it before normal fatal delivery. How? seccomp does force_sig_seccomp() sends the signal to current, current can't return to usermode and call signalfd_dequeue(), get_signal() must dequeue SIGSYS and notice SA_IMMUTABLE. And since this signal is private, signalfd_dequeue() from another thread can't dequeue it either. No? Oleg.