From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [REVIEW][PATCHv2 03/26] signal/arm64: Use force_sig not force_sig_fault for SIGKILL Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 15:59:20 -0500 Message-ID: <8736l4evkn.fsf@xmission.com> References: <20190523003916.20726-1-ebiederm@xmission.com> <20190523003916.20726-4-ebiederm@xmission.com> <20190523101702.GG26646@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> <875zq1gnh4.fsf_-_@xmission.com> <20190523161509.GE31896@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20190523161509.GE31896@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> (Will Deacon's message of "Thu, 23 May 2019 17:15:09 +0100") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Will Deacon Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Containers , Oleg Nesterov , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin , James Morse List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org Will Deacon writes: > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:11:19AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> index ade32046f3fe..e45d5b440fb1 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> @@ -256,7 +256,10 @@ void arm64_force_sig_fault(int signo, int code, void __user *addr, >> const char *str) >> { >> arm64_show_signal(signo, str); >> - force_sig_fault(signo, code, addr, current); >> + if (signo == SIGKILL) >> + force_sig(SIGKILL, current); >> + else >> + force_sig_fault(signo, code, addr, current); >> } > > Acked-by: Will Deacon > > Are you planning to send this series on, or would you like me to pick this > into the arm64 tree? I am planning on taking this through siginfo tree, unless it causes problems. The rest of my patchset this is a part of is a clean up to remove the task pointer which is always current from all of the force_sig calls. Eric From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:41507 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726222AbfEWU7a (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 May 2019 16:59:30 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) References: <20190523003916.20726-1-ebiederm@xmission.com> <20190523003916.20726-4-ebiederm@xmission.com> <20190523101702.GG26646@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> <875zq1gnh4.fsf_-_@xmission.com> <20190523161509.GE31896@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 15:59:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20190523161509.GE31896@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> (Will Deacon's message of "Thu, 23 May 2019 17:15:09 +0100") Message-ID: <8736l4evkn.fsf@xmission.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [REVIEW][PATCHv2 03/26] signal/arm64: Use force_sig not force_sig_fault for SIGKILL Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Will Deacon Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Containers , Oleg Nesterov , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin , James Morse Message-ID: <20190523205920.A8JAAVyqAphX7vtws2VARxqZPISZjjCJ8Al0Nn_UkAY@z> Will Deacon writes: > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:11:19AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> index ade32046f3fe..e45d5b440fb1 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> @@ -256,7 +256,10 @@ void arm64_force_sig_fault(int signo, int code, void __user *addr, >> const char *str) >> { >> arm64_show_signal(signo, str); >> - force_sig_fault(signo, code, addr, current); >> + if (signo == SIGKILL) >> + force_sig(SIGKILL, current); >> + else >> + force_sig_fault(signo, code, addr, current); >> } > > Acked-by: Will Deacon > > Are you planning to send this series on, or would you like me to pick this > into the arm64 tree? I am planning on taking this through siginfo tree, unless it causes problems. The rest of my patchset this is a part of is a clean up to remove the task pointer which is always current from all of the force_sig calls. Eric