From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70BD5C25B08 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 14:05:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=de/kQhfPTrk+aC0Wl7ngYbQnu6RiZSCD2lHqf2C7pzI=; b=GWdTtXA0BKsj3+ wn1gW6njYAkToutvOVv8BJqr3OwA5i7kxiSoSwFxqBk6g8MdjHTbQpQMLm0xg/k9tQDTpmQ3RW7qH SqZ57JFpYPAW7wAMtMKcdX/mBsvBNDfWVaQdNwZg/GCUJQWSvG7dnt2WuvLeb/ioeStmOiSyCIn4T MOWxrbhJZIJDj/QtuKUcWEZGspRYmkQ5apepXjCVOlXL4xTOa+dAX96BQ83qtoLrncqewK8AnuOok 8Nk7CSnLIqh0AwCBOCzCIKClQFP5NgAQUSPHEyxqNBmBIrnDjwP+Zh+PRaPxJ1qTqrCojhUNajBdx 04MikWPVtNxe8xkuvbgA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1oOJfB-002efH-SV; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 14:04:53 +0000 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org ([145.40.68.75]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1oOJf5-002eaS-6S for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 14:04:48 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC1C1B81DD2 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 14:04:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DCAFFC433D6; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 14:04:43 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 15:04:40 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Mark Brown Cc: Will Deacon , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] arm64/signal: Raise limit on stack frames Message-ID: References: <20220815132834.229769-1-broonie@kernel.org> <20220815132834.229769-2-broonie@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220815132834.229769-2-broonie@kernel.org> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220817_070447_430523_39E78979 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 24.04 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 02:28:31PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > The signal code has a limit of 64K on the size of a stack frame that it > will generate, if this limit is exceeded then a process will be killed if > it receives a signal. Unfortunately with the advent of SME this limit is > too small - the maximum possible size of the ZA register alone is 64K. This > is not an issue for practical systems at present but is easily seen using > virtual platforms. > > Raise the limit to 256K, this is substantially more than could be used by > any current architecture extension. > > Signed-off-by: Mark Brown > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > index 3e6d0352d7d3..a410c980e50e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ static size_t sigframe_size(struct rt_sigframe_user_layout const *user) > * not taken into account. This limit is not a guarantee and is > * NOT ABI. > */ > -#define SIGFRAME_MAXSZ SZ_64K > +#define SIGFRAME_MAXSZ (SZ_64K * 4) Why not SZ_256K? Otherwise it looks fine: Acked-by: Catalin Marinas _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel