[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180412110314.GA28070@altlinux.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:03:14 +0300
From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: sparc/ppc/arm compat siginfo ABI regressions: sending SIGFPE via
kill() returns wrong values in si_pid and si_uid
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:58:11AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 04:34:35AM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > A similar commit v4.16-rc1~159^2~37
> > ("signal/arm: Document conflicts with SI_USER and SIGFPE") must have
> > introduced a similar ABI regression to compat arm.
>
> So, could you explain how can this change cause a regression?
>
> +#define FPE_FIXME 0
> - vfp_raise_sigfpe(0, regs);
> + vfp_raise_sigfpe(FPE_FIXME, regs);
No, this hunk hasn't caused the regression, but another one did:
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h b/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d051388
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+#ifndef __ASM_SIGINFO_H
+#define __ASM_SIGINFO_H
+
+#include <asm-generic/siginfo.h>
+
+/*
+ * SIGFPE si_codes
+ */
+#ifdef __KERNEL__
+#define FPE_FIXME 0 /* Broken dup of SI_USER */
+#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
+
+#endif
This is due to FPE_FIXME handling in kernel/signal.c
--
ldv
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists