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=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no 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 B8811C2D0A3 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:37:45 +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 4DF4D2067D for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:37:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="jHRorMt+" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4DF4D2067D 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=vZeXo9K39Pl+QH/r2WQdxM1MDuHrMhg5xCNdH2zb4ik=; b=jHRorMt+JvEH6001L3tokWMkx dOACZEcKTqMSpxqalgpI6N00SQZeNyU+qiUba5vgeuDYYyqEWm7MSVTosttp8dMgbW21NUnyNoidE wWYg+sp3lImWge5mFCyzn8mZYLXhoQ9xojfRhPsjb5oFcXu8EuMRX4j6t1gvMXVFSxcaJ0smuvl3i nW+UgqBWV08Urr1upIn4jMX0U/vAOXDpKCa38C4Ql8v8P3CuWvQOtTsMiDp/5AEMrVCd2HQjwSrPs D0GWN2xeKLetO0tAadsmosVAKs5GapPYTyAsbHucX0yUbhEz6+YSG9caMMk6FArXf+Fqs2xJ22c7h Q5wgBPUjg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kaMht-00071M-AM; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 17:36:25 +0000 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kaMhr-0006zg-1u for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 17:36:24 +0000 Received: from in01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.51]) by out03.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1kaMhi-00APEI-C1; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 10:36:14 -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 1kaMhh-0005Qj-Ij; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 10:36:14 -0700 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Catalin Marinas References: <7e26600459cb08c5016611b37fe88c23098b40eb.1604376407.git.pcc@google.com> <87a6vx6p11.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20201104172447.GF28902@gaia> Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 11:36:10 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20201104172447.GF28902@gaia> (Catalin Marinas's message of "Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:24:48 +0000") Message-ID: <87wnz158j9.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=1kaMhh-0005Qj-Ij; ; ; mid=<87wnz158j9.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>; ; ; hst=in01.mta.xmission.com; ; ; ip=68.227.160.95; ; ; frm=ebiederm@xmission.com; ; ; spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX19wDmSuxLiGAq/37pZxeGaX+VODqDFxCx0= 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_123623_187892_7C9A0EB1 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 26.29 ) 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: Peter Collingbourne , 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 Catalin Marinas writes: > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 10:54:34AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> 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. > > Minor nits, unless you nak the whole approach of SA_FAULTFLAGS and > SA_UNSUPPORTED ;) (it looks a bit complicated to me but I don't have a > better idea for a generic implementation). > >> 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? > > However you prefer (I usually start queuing patches at -rc3). If you > pick them up, please provide a stable branch somewhere so that we can > add the others on top. I just want to make certain the cleanups don't get lost in the shuffle. If we are almost there then I will focus my energy on reviewing the patches and make certain there isn't something important that has been overlooked. I don't expect there is. Eric _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel