[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180415131206.GR16141@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 14:12:06 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
sparclinux <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <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 Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 12:53:49PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 11:45 AM, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com> wrote:
> >
> > Most uses I've seen do nothing more than use the FPE_xyz value to
> > format diagnostic messages while dying. I struggled to find code that
> > made a meaningful functional decision based on the value, though that's
> > not proof...
>
> Yeah. I've seen code that cares about SIGFPE deeply, but it's almost
> invariably about some emulated environment (eg Java VM, or CPU
> emulation).
>
> And the siginfo data is basically never good enough for those
> environments anyway on its own, so they will go and look at the actual
> instruction that caused the fault and the register state instead,
> because they need *all* the information.
>
> The cases that use si_code are the ones that just trapped signals in
> order to give a more helpful abort message.
>
> So I could certainly imagine that si_code is actually used by somebody
> who then decides to actuall act differently on it, but aside from
> perhaps printing out a different message, it sounds far-fetched.
Okay, in that case let's just use FPE_FLTINV. That makes the patch
easily back-portable for stable kernels.
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up
Powered by blists - more mailing lists