Geert Uytterhoeven writes:
> Hi Eric,
>
> Patch 21/20?
In reviewing another part of the patchset Linus asked if force_sigsegv
could go away. It can't completely but I can get this far.
Given that it is just a cleanup it makes most sense to me as an
additional patch on top of what is already he
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 11:52 PM Eric W. Biederman
wrote:
>
>
> Now that force_fatal_sig exists it is unnecessary and a bit confusing
> to use force_sigsegv in cases where the simpler force_fatal_sig is
> wanted. So change every instance we can to make the code clearer.
>
> Signed-off-by: "Eric W
Hi Eric,
Patch 21/20?
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 11:52 PM Eric W. Biederman
wrote:
> Now that force_fatal_sig exists it is unnecessary and a bit confusing
> to use force_sigsegv in cases where the simpler force_fatal_sig is
> wanted. So change every instance we can to make the code clearer.
>
> Si
Now that force_fatal_sig exists it is unnecessary and a bit confusing
to use force_sigsegv in cases where the simpler force_fatal_sig is
wanted. So change every instance we can to make the code clearer.
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman"
---
arch/arc/kernel/process.c | 2 +-
arch/m68k/k
