Re: [PATCH] riscv: signal: fix sigaltstack frame size checking - patchwork-bot+linux-riscv

From: patchwork-bot+linux-riscv@kernel.org
To: Andy Chiu <andy.chiu@sifive.com>
Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, palmer@dabbelt.com,
	greentime.hu@sifive.com, guoren@linux.alibaba.com,
	bjorn@kernel.org, prashanthsw@google.com,
	paul.walmsley@sifive.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, heiko@sntech.de,
	conor.dooley@microchip.com, vincent.chen@sifive.com,
	mathis.salmen@matsal.de, guoren@kernel.org,
	abrestic@rivosinc.com, vineetg@rivosinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: signal: fix sigaltstack frame size checking
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 20:30:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <169342742856.1913.346835695901191456.git-patchwork-notify@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230822164904.21660-1-andy.chiu@sifive.com>

Hello:

This patch was applied to riscv/linux.git (for-next)
by Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>:

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 16:49:03 +0000 you wrote:
> The alternative stack checking in get_sigframe introduced by the Vector
> support is not needed and has a problem. It is not needed as we have
> already validate it at the beginning of the function if we are already
> on an altstack. If not, the size of an altstack is always validated at
> its allocation stage with sigaltstack_size_valid().
> 
> Besides, we must only regard the size of an altstack if the handler of a
> signal is registered with SA_ONSTACK. So, blindly checking overflow of
> an altstack if sas_ss_size not equals to zero will check against wrong
> signal handlers if only a subset of signals are registered with
> SA_ONSTACK.
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - riscv: signal: fix sigaltstack frame size checking
    https://git.kernel.org/riscv/c/0caa0b447398

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv