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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F8ACC4742C for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 16:56:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9458206CA for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 16:56:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="YUUHHao/" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E9458206CA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=xmission.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Subject:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=xl/GFvhXLT3EnSS2dcrxvJ8UaPmC0iDm81vmBGySrk4=; b=YUUHHao/OIN3STSj5iuYf5a7k +viDoY76y7GuJhY+Y1FyEl1198kz05HS4VcZeEX085+IqlPgBBG/VBxeP+lb21n/huaQMALuYiowb x2Ps4G42dNq5dTTSFemFiDypqKh+cUIXfJtrGXVN2kOurQ5nr5C/s5xzLaX4Fl2YE0v5gBeHWYEUM erGqZRe9jc0gj0yRWWAULZXR0GVA+PgO0z1zuF4AB3odB85Zu7yB/WifFjgAFB/YEuHBO8YYO/EaB 7Xb7Rrraqx/8YGFUgcISaV4VPnFxj1rCen246CUUX52RAyxFeOuB/Azj4oBkiNhSytmMouuVwK9Gs En0P/ozLw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kaM4J-0001P2-42; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 16:55:31 +0000 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kaM4F-0001K7-Kf for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 16:55:29 +0000 Received: from in01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.51]) by out01.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1kaM3S-007l6D-Bu; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 09:54:38 -0700 Received: from ip68-227-160-95.om.om.cox.net ([68.227.160.95] helo=x220.xmission.com) by in01.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1kaM3R-0004lB-C6; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 09:54:38 -0700 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Peter Collingbourne References: <7e26600459cb08c5016611b37fe88c23098b40eb.1604376407.git.pcc@google.com> Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 10:54:34 -0600 In-Reply-To: <7e26600459cb08c5016611b37fe88c23098b40eb.1604376407.git.pcc@google.com> (Peter Collingbourne's message of "Mon, 2 Nov 2020 20:09:37 -0800") Message-ID: <87a6vx6p11.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-XM-SPF: eid=1kaM3R-0004lB-C6; ; ; mid=<87a6vx6p11.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>; ; ; hst=in01.mta.xmission.com; ; ; ip=68.227.160.95; ; ; frm=ebiederm@xmission.com; ; ; spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX18kWKJVLqoX1XbrReT7yyy6uVwGbRy1A/w= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 68.227.160.95 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 1/8] parisc: Drop parisc special case for __sighandler_t X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201104_115527_709868_A2321CCA X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 26.21 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Catalin Marinas , Helge Deller , Kevin Brodsky , Oleg Nesterov , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, "James E.J. Bottomley" , Kostya Serebryany , Linux ARM , Andrey Konovalov , David Spickett , Vincenzo Frascino , Will Deacon , Dave Martin , Evgenii Stepanov , Richard Henderson 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 Peter Collingbourne writes: > From: Helge Deller > > I believe we can and *should* drop this parisc-specific typedef for > __sighandler_t when compiling a 64-bit kernel. The reasons: > > 1. We don't have a 64-bit userspace yet, so nothing (on userspace side) > can break. > > 2. Inside the Linux kernel, this is only used in kernel/signal.c, in > function kernel_sigaction() where the signal handler is compared against > SIG_IGN. SIG_IGN is defined as (__sighandler_t)1), so only the pointers > are compared. > > 3. Even when a 64-bit userspace gets added at some point, I think > __sighandler_t should be defined what it is: a function pointer struct. > > I compiled kernel/signal.c with and without the patch, and the produced code > is identical in both cases. > > Signed-off-by: Helge Deller > Reviewed-by: Peter Collingbourne > Link: > https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I21c43f21b264f339e3aa395626af838646f62d97 Peter as you have sent this, this also needs your Signed-off-by. Otherwise this looks reasonable to me. Acked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" While the final bits look like they are still under discussion it looks like the preceding cleanups are pretty solid at this point. Any chance we can get the cleanups into a tree in linux-next so that the discussion can focus on the core parts of this work? Perhaps I should pick up the clenaups? Eric > --- > arch/parisc/include/uapi/asm/signal.h | 8 -------- > 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/parisc/include/uapi/asm/signal.h b/arch/parisc/include/uapi/asm/signal.h > index e605197b462c..d9c51769851a 100644 > --- a/arch/parisc/include/uapi/asm/signal.h > +++ b/arch/parisc/include/uapi/asm/signal.h > @@ -85,16 +85,8 @@ > struct siginfo; > > /* Type of a signal handler. */ > -#if defined(__LP64__) > -/* function pointers on 64-bit parisc are pointers to little structs and the > - * compiler doesn't support code which changes or tests the address of > - * the function in the little struct. This is really ugly -PB > - */ > -typedef char __user *__sighandler_t; > -#else > typedef void __signalfn_t(int); > typedef __signalfn_t __user *__sighandler_t; > -#endif > > typedef struct sigaltstack { > void __user *ss_sp; _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel