Messages in this thread | | | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | Fri, 24 May 2019 17:36:41 -0500 | Subject | Re: [REVIEW][PATCHv2 03/26] signal/arm64: Use force_sig not force_sig_fault for SIGKILL |
| |
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> writes:
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 03:59:20PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> writes: >> >> > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:11:19AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> >> index ade32046f3fe..e45d5b440fb1 100644 >> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> >> @@ -256,7 +256,10 @@ void arm64_force_sig_fault(int signo, int code, void __user *addr, >> >> const char *str) >> >> { >> >> arm64_show_signal(signo, str); >> >> - force_sig_fault(signo, code, addr, current); >> >> + if (signo == SIGKILL) >> >> + force_sig(SIGKILL, current); >> >> + else >> >> + force_sig_fault(signo, code, addr, current); >> >> } >> > >> > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> >> > >> > Are you planning to send this series on, or would you like me to pick this >> > into the arm64 tree? >> >> I am planning on taking this through siginfo tree, unless it causes >> problems. > > Okey doke, it would just be nice to see this patch land in 5.2, that's > all.
As this does not appear to have any real world consequences I am aiming at 5.3. If someone else would like to take it and feed it to Linus sooner I won't object.
Eric
| |