Re: [PATCH 3/8] signal/sparc: Document a conflict with SI_USER with SIGFPE

2017-07-18 Thread Eric W. Biederman
ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes: > David Miller writes: > >> From: "Eric W. Biederman" >> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 07:39:01 -0500 >> >>> diff --git a/arch/sparc/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h >>> b/arch/sparc/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h >>> index 2d9b79ccaa50..6bc5c677e92f 100644 >>>

Re: [PATCH 3/8] signal/sparc: Document a conflict with SI_USER with SIGFPE

2017-06-30 Thread Eric W. Biederman
David Miller writes: > From: "Eric W. Biederman" > Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 07:39:01 -0500 > >> diff --git a/arch/sparc/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h >> b/arch/sparc/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h >> index 2d9b79ccaa50..6bc5c677e92f 100644 >> --- a/arch/sparc/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h >> +++ b/arch/spa

Re: [PATCH 3/8] signal/sparc: Document a conflict with SI_USER with SIGFPE

2017-06-30 Thread David Miller
From: "Eric W. Biederman" Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 07:39:01 -0500 > diff --git a/arch/sparc/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h > b/arch/sparc/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h > index 2d9b79ccaa50..6bc5c677e92f 100644 > --- a/arch/sparc/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h > +++ b/arch/sparc/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h > @

[PATCH 3/8] signal/sparc: Document a conflict with SI_USER with SIGFPE

2017-06-30 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Setting si_code to __SI_FAULT results in a userspace seeing an si_code of 0. This is the same si_code as SI_USER. Posix and common sense requires that SI_USER not be a signal specific si_code. As such this use of 0 for the si_code is a pretty horribly broken ABI. This was introduced in 2.3.41 s