linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.19 111/167] signal/arc: Use force_sig

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

Message-ID: <87y2z4nhd8.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
Date:   Wed, 04 Sep 2019 11:41:55 -0500
From:   ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:     Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...opsys.com>,
        linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.19 111/167] signal/arc: Use force_sig_fault where appropriate

Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> writes:

> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 11:49:16AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> writes:
>>
>>> From: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
>>>
>>> [ Upstream commit 15773ae938d8d93d982461990bebad6e1d7a1830 ]
>>
>>To the best of my knowledge this is just a clean up, no changes in
>>behavior are present.
>>
>>The only reason I can see to backport this is so that later fixes could
>>be applied cleanly.
>>
>>So while I have no objections to this patch being backported I don't see
>>why you would want to either.
>
> This patch along with the next one came in as a dependency for
> a8c715b4dd73c ("ARC: mm: SIGSEGV userspace trying to access kernel
> virtual memory").

Thanks for providing the rest of the context.

That looks like a perfect reason for backporting this patch.

Eric