public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, arch/*/*/*signal*.c and all such
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 22:12:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120427211244.GO6871@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120427202002.8ED632C0BF@topped-with-meat.com>

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 01:20:02PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:

> But I will say that the intent of tracehook_signal_handler has always
> been what its kerneldoc says: Call it once when handler setup is
> complete (exactly once per signal delivery, so potentially multiple
> times before actually returning to user mode).  Though it is indeed a
> no-op today when stepping==0, we want its use to continue to conform
> to that exact definition so that one day we could add e.g. a
> PTRACE_EVENT_SIGNAL_HANDLED feature just by hacking tracehook.h and
> not have to go back into every arch's signal code and recover
> understanding of how the call is being used.  (It was more than enough
> work to do that once when I broke out and documented the tracehook.h
> interfaces the first time.)  You know, as if we thought modularity
> were a useful notion.

OK...  FWIW, it sounds like an argument for using it (or a function in
kernel/signal.c that would call it) on all architectures.

Note that there's an extra complication on alpha and itanic - we have more
than just struct pt_regs * there.  If we care about the rest of registers
(struct switch_stack on alpha), we probably need to do something about that.
Hell knows...  On alpha, in particular, we always get switch_stack argument
of do_notify_resume() et.al. at the constant offset below pt_regs one -
        mov     $sp, $16
        bsr     $1, do_switch_stack
        mov     $sp, $17
is how it's done.  So there we could switch to use of container_of().  On
ia64 we have struct sigscratch with pt_regs embedded into it, so there
container_of() is also reasonable.  I wonder how alpha and itanic deal
with do_coredump(), BTW - it gets pt_regs, but not the rest...

Another fun story: x86 and mips has do_notify_resume() with void *unused as
its second argument.  It used to be sigset_t *oldset and it remains unused
since 2006 or so.  Three years later arch/score went in - with the same
void *unused as the second argument of do_notify_resume().  Gotta love the
cargo-cult programming...

BTW, what's the story with 'cookie' argument of get_signal_to_deliver()?
Everything passes NULL in it and nothing actually looks at the value
passed (it's passed further without being looked at, until it reaches
ptrace_signal_deliver(), which ignores it completely on all architectures).
AFAICS, it's a rudiment of something that was used only on sparc and got
discarded as hopeless in commit 28e6103665301ce60634e8a77f0b657c6cc099de
Author: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Sun May 11 02:07:19 2008 -0700
    sparc: Fix debugger syscall restart interactions.
Is there anything else to it?  If not, I'd rather get rid of that thing...
Frankly, I'm somewhat tempted to add something like
struct k_sigcontext {
	int sig;
	siginfo_t info;
	struct k_sigaction ka;
}; and turn get_signal_to_deliver into
bool get_signal_to_deliver(struct k_sigcontext *ctx, struct pt_regs *regs),
with ctx passed through handle_signal/setup_frame/tracehook_signal_deliver
instead of the same triple shoved into three arguments, in more or less
random order as it's done now.  Perhaps let tracehook_signal_deliver() keep
its type and semantics and introduce
void signal_delivered(struct k_sigcontext *, struct pt_regs *, int stepping)
that would be called by all handle_signal() after successful frame setup
and would call tracehook_... itself, after having done block_sigmask()...

  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-27 21:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 91+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-18 13:04 [PULL REQUEST] : ima-appraisal patches Mimi Zohar
2012-04-18 15:02 ` James Morris
2012-04-18 18:07   ` Mimi Zohar
2012-04-18 18:39     ` Al Viro
2012-04-18 20:56       ` Mimi Zohar
2012-04-19 19:57       ` Mimi Zohar
2012-04-20  0:43         ` [RFC] situation with fput() locking (was Re: [PULL REQUEST] : ima-appraisal patches) Al Viro
2012-04-20  2:31           ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20  2:54             ` Al Viro
2012-04-20  2:58               ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20  8:09                 ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 15:56                   ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20 16:08                     ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 16:42                       ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 17:21                         ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20 18:07                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-23 18:01                             ` [RFC] TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, arch/*/*/*signal*.c and all such Al Viro
2012-04-23 18:37                               ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-24  7:26                               ` Al Viro
2012-04-25  3:06                                 ` Al Viro
2012-04-25 12:37                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 12:50                                     ` Al Viro
2012-04-25 13:03                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 13:32                                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 13:32                                         ` Al Viro
2012-04-25 14:52                                           ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 15:46                                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 16:10                                               ` Al Viro
2012-04-25 17:02                                                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 17:51                                                   ` Al Viro
2012-04-26  7:15                                                     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-04-26  7:25                                                       ` David Miller
2012-04-26 13:52                                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-26 14:31                                                         ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-04-26 13:22                                                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-26 18:37                                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-26 23:19                                   ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 17:24                                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-27 17:54                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-05-02 10:37                                         ` Matt Fleming
2012-05-02 14:14                                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 18:45                                       ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 19:14                                         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2012-04-27 19:34                                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-29 22:51                                             ` Al Viro
2012-04-30  6:39                                               ` Greg Ungerer
2012-04-27 19:42                                         ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 20:20                                         ` Roland McGrath
2012-04-27 21:12                                           ` Al Viro [this message]
2012-04-27 21:27                                             ` Roland McGrath
2012-04-27 23:15                                               ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 23:32                                                 ` Al Viro
2012-04-29  4:12                                                   ` Al Viro
2012-04-30  8:06                                                     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-04-27 23:50                                                 ` Al Viro
2012-04-28 18:51                                                   ` [PATCH] arch/tile: avoid calling do_signal() after fork from a kernel thread Chris Metcalf
2012-04-28 20:55                                                     ` Al Viro
2012-04-28 21:46                                                       ` Chris Metcalf
2012-04-29  0:55                                                         ` Al Viro
2012-04-28 18:51                                                           ` [PATCH v2] arch/tile: fix up some issues in calling do_work_pending() Chris Metcalf
2012-04-29  3:49                                                           ` [PATCH] arch/tile: avoid calling do_signal() after fork from a kernel thread Chris Metcalf
2012-04-28  2:42                                                 ` [RFC] TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, arch/*/*/*signal*.c and all such Al Viro
2012-04-28  3:32                                                   ` Al Viro
2012-04-28  3:36                                                     ` Al Viro
2012-04-29 16:33                                                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-29 16:18                                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-29 18:05                                                     ` Al Viro
2012-05-01  4:31                                                       ` Al Viro
2012-05-01  5:06                                                         ` Mike Frysinger
2012-05-01  5:52                                                           ` Al Viro
2012-05-02 17:24                                                             ` Al Viro
2012-05-02 18:30                                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-29 16:41                                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-29 18:09                                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-29 18:25                                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-20  3:15               ` [RFC] situation with fput() locking (was Re: [PULL REQUEST] : ima-appraisal patches) Al Viro
2012-04-20 18:54           ` Hugh Dickins
2012-04-20 19:04             ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 19:18               ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20 19:32                 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-04-20 19:58                 ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 21:12                   ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20 22:13                     ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 22:35                       ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-27  7:35                         ` Kasatkin, Dmitry
2012-04-27 17:34                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 18:52                             ` Kasatkin, Dmitry
2012-04-27 19:15                               ` Kasatkin, Dmitry
2012-04-30 14:32                             ` Mimi Zohar
2012-05-03  4:23                               ` James Morris
2012-04-20 19:37               ` Al Viro

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=20120427211244.GO6871@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=roland@hack.frob.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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