lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/6] Final si_trapno bits
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 01:09PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> As a part of a fix for the ABI of the newly added SIGTRAP TRAP_PERF a
> si_trapno was reduced to an ordinary extention of the _sigfault case
> of struct siginfo.
>
> When Linus saw the complete set of changes come in as a fix he requested
> that the set of changes be trimmed down to just what was necessary to
> fix the SIGTRAP TRAP_PERF ABI.
>
> I had intended to get the rest of the changes into the merge window for
> v5.14 but I dropped the ball.
>
> I have made the changes to stop using __ARCH_SI_TRAPNO be per
> architecture so they are easier to review. In doing so I found one
> place on alpha where I used send_sig_fault instead of
> send_sig_fault_trapno(... si_trapno = 0). That would not have changed
> the userspace behavior but it did make the kernel code less clear.
>
> My rule in these patches is everywhere that siginfo layout calls
> for SIL_FAULT_TRAPNO the code uses either force_sig_fault_trapno
> or send_sig_fault_trapno.
>
> And of course I have rebased and compile tested Marco's compile time
> assert patches.
>
> Eric
>
>
> Eric W. Biederman (3):
> signal/sparc: si_trapno is only used with SIGILL ILL_ILLTRP
> signal/alpha: si_trapno is only used with SIGFPE and SIGTRAP TRAP_UNK
> signal: Remove the generic __ARCH_SI_TRAPNO support
>
> Marco Elver (3):
> sparc64: Add compile-time asserts for siginfo_t offsets
> arm: Add compile-time asserts for siginfo_t offsets
> arm64: Add compile-time asserts for siginfo_t offsets

Nice, thanks for the respin. If I diffed it right, I see this is almost
(modulo what you mentioned above) equivalent to:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-api/m1tuni8ano.fsf_-_@fess.ebiederm.org/
+ what's already in mainline. It's only missing:

signal: Verify the alignment and size of siginfo_t
signal: Rename SIL_PERF_EVENT SIL_FAULT_PERF_EVENT for consistency

Would this be appropriate for this series, or rather separately, or
dropped completely?

Thanks,
-- Marco

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-16 13:52    [W:0.483 / U:0.376 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site