From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: fpsimd: Fix bad si_code for undiagnosed SIGFPE
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 13:10:18 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180309131017.GB20370@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87o9jymbsj.fsf@xmission.com>
Hi Eric,
On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 04:40:12PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 05:44:07PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote:
> >> Currently a SIGFPE delivered in response to a floating-point
> >> exception trap may have si_code set to 0 on arm64. As reported by
> >> Eric, this is a bad idea since this is the value of SI_USER -- yet
> >> this signal is definitely not the result of kill(2), tgkill(2) etc.
> >> and si_uid and si_pid make limited sense whereas we do want to
> >> yield a value for si_addr (which doesn't exist for SI_USER).
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> >> index e7226c4..9040038 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> >> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
> >> #include <linux/slab.h>
> >> #include <linux/sysctl.h>
> >>
> >> +#include <asm/esr.h>
> >> #include <asm/fpsimd.h>
> >> #include <asm/cputype.h>
> >> #include <asm/simd.h>
> >> @@ -867,18 +868,20 @@ asmlinkage void do_fpsimd_acc(unsigned int esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
> >> asmlinkage void do_fpsimd_exc(unsigned int esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
> >> {
> >> siginfo_t info;
> >> - unsigned int si_code = FPE_FIXME;
> >> -
> >> - if (esr & FPEXC_IOF)
> >> - si_code = FPE_FLTINV;
> >> - else if (esr & FPEXC_DZF)
> >> - si_code = FPE_FLTDIV;
> >> - else if (esr & FPEXC_OFF)
> >> - si_code = FPE_FLTOVF;
> >> - else if (esr & FPEXC_UFF)
> >> - si_code = FPE_FLTUND;
> >> - else if (esr & FPEXC_IXF)
> >> - si_code = FPE_FLTRES;
> >> + unsigned int si_code = FPE_FLTUNK;
> >
> > Happy to take this patch once the dependency on FPE_FLTUNK in core code is
> > resolved.
>
> Would it help for me to take the FPE_FLTUNK patch into my siginfo-next
> branch? So that there is a common branch with the code so we don't
> need to worry about conflicts. If so I will look at that on Monday.
Yes please, that would be helpful actually. I can then pull that into
arm64 if you give me a stable branch or tag. Alternatively, I can define
FPE_FLTUNK locally and remove it at -rc1.
Cheers,
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: fpsimd: Fix bad si_code for undiagnosed SIGFPE
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 13:10:18 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180309131017.GB20370@arm.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20180309131018.aaIMbYhEtUwkANB_SpTvzoQImk1tDEeArgNlWvzRz2w@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87o9jymbsj.fsf@xmission.com>
Hi Eric,
On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 04:40:12PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 05:44:07PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote:
> >> Currently a SIGFPE delivered in response to a floating-point
> >> exception trap may have si_code set to 0 on arm64. As reported by
> >> Eric, this is a bad idea since this is the value of SI_USER -- yet
> >> this signal is definitely not the result of kill(2), tgkill(2) etc.
> >> and si_uid and si_pid make limited sense whereas we do want to
> >> yield a value for si_addr (which doesn't exist for SI_USER).
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> >> index e7226c4..9040038 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> >> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
> >> #include <linux/slab.h>
> >> #include <linux/sysctl.h>
> >>
> >> +#include <asm/esr.h>
> >> #include <asm/fpsimd.h>
> >> #include <asm/cputype.h>
> >> #include <asm/simd.h>
> >> @@ -867,18 +868,20 @@ asmlinkage void do_fpsimd_acc(unsigned int esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
> >> asmlinkage void do_fpsimd_exc(unsigned int esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
> >> {
> >> siginfo_t info;
> >> - unsigned int si_code = FPE_FIXME;
> >> -
> >> - if (esr & FPEXC_IOF)
> >> - si_code = FPE_FLTINV;
> >> - else if (esr & FPEXC_DZF)
> >> - si_code = FPE_FLTDIV;
> >> - else if (esr & FPEXC_OFF)
> >> - si_code = FPE_FLTOVF;
> >> - else if (esr & FPEXC_UFF)
> >> - si_code = FPE_FLTUND;
> >> - else if (esr & FPEXC_IXF)
> >> - si_code = FPE_FLTRES;
> >> + unsigned int si_code = FPE_FLTUNK;
> >
> > Happy to take this patch once the dependency on FPE_FLTUNK in core code is
> > resolved.
>
> Would it help for me to take the FPE_FLTUNK patch into my siginfo-next
> branch? So that there is a common branch with the code so we don't
> need to worry about conflicts. If so I will look at that on Monday.
Yes please, that would be helpful actually. I can then pull that into
arm64 if you give me a stable branch or tag. Alternatively, I can define
FPE_FLTUNK locally and remove it at -rc1.
Cheers,
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-09 13:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-01 17:44 [PATCH v2 0/3] arm64: Fix invalid si_codes for fault signals Dave Martin
2018-03-01 17:44 ` Dave Martin
2018-03-01 17:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] signal: Add FPE_FLTUNK si_code for undiagnosable fp exceptions Dave Martin
2018-03-01 17:44 ` Dave Martin
2018-03-08 17:11 ` Will Deacon
2018-03-08 17:11 ` Will Deacon
2018-03-08 22:35 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-03-08 22:35 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-03-01 17:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: fpsimd: Fix bad si_code for undiagnosed SIGFPE Dave Martin
2018-03-01 17:44 ` Dave Martin
2018-03-08 17:11 ` Will Deacon
2018-03-08 17:11 ` Will Deacon
2018-03-08 22:40 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-03-08 22:40 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-03-09 13:10 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2018-03-09 13:10 ` Will Deacon
2018-03-09 14:25 ` Dave Martin
2018-03-09 14:25 ` Dave Martin
2018-03-15 21:13 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-03-15 21:13 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-03-20 10:04 ` Will Deacon
2018-03-20 10:04 ` Will Deacon
2018-03-08 22:37 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-03-08 22:37 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-03-01 17:44 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: signal: Ensure si_code is valid for all fault signals Dave Martin
2018-03-01 17:44 ` Dave Martin
2018-03-08 16:37 ` Will Deacon
2018-03-08 16:37 ` Will Deacon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180309131017.GB20370@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox