On Wednesday 26 June 2013 18:59, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 06:14:52PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > Or simply remove the BUG_ON(), this can equally confuse wait(status).
> > 128 & 0x7f == 0.
> >
> > Still I think it would be better to change _NSIG on mips.
>
> If it was t
On 06/28, James Hogan wrote:
>
> On 26/06/13 18:15, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > I meant the minimal hack like
> >
> > --- x/arch/mips/include/uapi/asm/signal.h
> > +++ x/arch/mips/include/uapi/asm/signal.h
> > @@ -11,9 +11,9 @@
> >
> > #include
> >
> > -#define _NSIG
On 26/06/13 18:15, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 06/26, Ralf Baechle wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 06:14:52PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>
>>> Or simply remove the BUG_ON(), this can equally confuse wait(status).
>>> 128 & 0x7f == 0.
>>>
>>> Still I think it would be better to change _NSIG on
On 06/26, Ralf Baechle wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 06:14:52PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > Or simply remove the BUG_ON(), this can equally confuse wait(status).
> > 128 & 0x7f == 0.
> >
> > Still I think it would be better to change _NSIG on mips.
>
> If it was that easy. That's going
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 06:14:52PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Or simply remove the BUG_ON(), this can equally confuse wait(status).
> 128 & 0x7f == 0.
>
> Still I think it would be better to change _NSIG on mips.
If it was that easy. That's going to outright break binary compatibility,
see k
On 06/26, James Hogan wrote:
>
> On 25/06/13 23:13, James Hogan wrote:
> BUG_ON(exit_code & 0x80); /* core dumps don't get here */
>
> As a quick fix, mask out higher bits in the signal number. This
> effectively matches the exit code from other code paths but avoids the
> BUG_ON.
>
> Signed-off
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 12:07:44PM +0100, James Hogan wrote:
> > IMO changing the ABI by reducing _NSIG to 127 or 126 isn't appropriate
> > for stable.
>
> How does this look for a nasty/stable fix?
> diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
> index 113411b..9ea8f4f 100644
> --- a/kernel/s
On 25/06/13 23:13, James Hogan wrote:
> On 25 June 2013 22:40, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> Meanwhile, unprivileged users can make a MIPS kernel go BUG.
>>
>> How much of a problem is this? Obviously less of a problem with MIPS
>> than it would be with some other CPU types, but I'd imagine it's still
On 25 June 2013 22:40, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:10:08 +0100 James Hogan wrote:
>
>> On 22/06/13 20:09, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> > On 06/21, David Daney wrote:
>> >> I am proposing that we just reduce the number of usable signals such
>> >> that existing libc status checking ma
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:10:08 +0100 James Hogan wrote:
> On 22/06/13 20:09, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 06/21, David Daney wrote:
> >> I am proposing that we just reduce the number of usable signals such
> >> that existing libc status checking macros/functions don't change in any
> >> way.
> >
>
On 21/06/13 16:59, David Daney wrote:
> On 06/21/2013 06:39 AM, James Hogan wrote:
>> MIPS has 128 signals, the highest of which has the number 128 (they
>> start from 1). The following command causes get_signal_to_deliver() to
>> pass this signal number straight through to do_group_exit() as the e
On 22/06/13 20:09, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 06/21, David Daney wrote:
>> I am proposing that we just reduce the number of usable signals such
>> that existing libc status checking macros/functions don't change in any
>> way.
>
> And I fully agree! Absolutely, sorry for confusion.
>
>
> What I t
On 06/21, David Daney wrote:
>
> On 06/21/2013 01:22 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> On 06/21, David Daney wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/21/2013 06:39 AM, James Hogan wrote:
Therefore add sig_to_exitcode() and exitcode_to_sig() functions which
map signal numbers > 126 to exit code 126 and puts the rem
On 06/21/2013 01:22 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 06/21, David Daney wrote:
On 06/21/2013 06:39 AM, James Hogan wrote:
Therefore add sig_to_exitcode() and exitcode_to_sig() functions which
map signal numbers > 126 to exit code 126 and puts the remainder (i.e.
sig - 126) in higher bits. This allo
On 06/21, David Daney wrote:
>
> On 06/21/2013 06:39 AM, James Hogan wrote:
>> Therefore add sig_to_exitcode() and exitcode_to_sig() functions which
>> map signal numbers > 126 to exit code 126 and puts the remainder (i.e.
>> sig - 126) in higher bits. This allows WIFSIGNALED() to return true for
>
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 08:59:32AM -0700, David Daney wrote:
> On 06/21/2013 06:39 AM, James Hogan wrote:
> >MIPS has 128 signals, the highest of which has the number 128 (they
> >start from 1). The following command causes get_signal_to_deliver() to
> >pass this signal number straight through to
On 06/21/2013 06:39 AM, James Hogan wrote:
MIPS has 128 signals, the highest of which has the number 128 (they
start from 1). The following command causes get_signal_to_deliver() to
pass this signal number straight through to do_group_exit() as the exit
code:
strace sleep 10 & sleep 1 && kill
17 matches
Mail list logo
