linux-kernel - Re: perf: weird si_code results on overflow signal

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87377i7dm2.fsf@xmission.com>
Date:   Tue, 19 Sep 2017 13:22:13 -0500
From:   ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:     Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: perf: weird si_code results on overflow signal

Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu> writes:

> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
>> I just compiled up a fresh git kernel and all of the perf_event_test 
>> overflow tests are failing.
>> 
>> The reason is that instead of getting POLL_IN or POLL_HUP sources as 
>> expected, they are getting weird results in si_code of "-5".
>> 
>> I haven't had time to bisect this, but I do notice that some major changes 
>> to si_code handling went in with
>> 	64a76d0d64bea159da997c002a916ffc03f98bfc
>
> resending in case everyone was away at plumbers...

Apologies it looks like I missed this one the first time through.

I will push ou tthe fix in just a minute.

Eric