On Jan 4, 2018, at 15:22, Phil Nelson <p...@pcnelson.net> wrote: > How about turning on the workaround for any process that ignores > or catches SEGV. Any process that is terminated by a SEGV should > be safe, shouldn't it?
Isn't there a suggested mitigation? Seems to me NetBSD should implement it as suggested, rather than coming up with its own special criteria for when to enable the workaround. -- Name: Dave Huang | Mammal, mammal / their names are called / INet: k...@azeotrope.org | they raise a paw / the bat, the cat / Telegram: @DahanC | dolphin and dog / koala bear and hog -- TMBG Dahan: Hani G Y+C 42 Y++ L+++ W- C++ T++ A+ E+ S++ V++ F- Q+++ P+ B+ PA+ PL++
