[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190523003916.20726-4-ebiederm@xmission.com>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 19:38:53 -0500
From: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: [REVIEW][PATCH 03/26] signal/arm64: Use force_sig not force_sig_fault for SIGKILL
It really only matters to debuggers but the SIGKILL does not have any
si_codes that use the fault member of the siginfo union. Correct this
the simple way and call force_sig instead of force_sig_fault when the
signal is SIGKILL.
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Fixes: af40ff687bc9 ("arm64: signal: Ensure si_code is valid for all fault signals")
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
---
arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
index ade32046f3fe..0feb17bdcaa0 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
@@ -282,6 +282,11 @@ void arm64_notify_die(const char *str, struct pt_regs *regs,
current->thread.fault_address = 0;
current->thread.fault_code = err;
+ if (signo == SIGKILL) {
+ arm64_show_signal(signo, str);
+ force_sig(signo, current);
+ return;
+ }
arm64_force_sig_fault(signo, sicode, addr, str);
} else {
die(str, regs, err);
--
2.21.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists