lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [REVIEW][PATCHv2 03/26] signal/arm64: Use force_sig not force_sig_fault for SIGKILL
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> 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 <will.deacon@arm.com>
>
> 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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-23 23:00    [W:0.118 / U:0.668 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site