Thread (2 messages) 2 messages, 2 authors, 2018-02-25

Re: [PATCH 04/11] signal/parisc: Document a conflict with SI_USER with SIGFPE

From: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
Date: 2018-02-25 19:50:19
Also in: lkml

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

On 23.02.2018 01:15, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Helge Deller [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
* Eric W. Biederman [off-list ref]:
quoted
Setting si_code to 0 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.

Further use of si_code == 0 guaranteed that copy_siginfo_to_user saw a
value of __SI_KILL and now sees a value of SIL_KILL with the result
that uid and pid fields are copied and which might copying the si_addr
field by accident but certainly not by design.  Making this a very
flakey implementation.

Utilizing FPE_FIXME siginfo_layout will now return SIL_FAULT and the
appropriate fields will reliably be copied.

This bug is 13 years old and parsic machines are no longer being built
so I don't know if it possible or worth fixing it.  But it is at least
worth documenting this so other architectures don't make the same
mistake.

I think we should fix it, even if we now break the ABI.

It's about a "conditional trap" which needs to be handled by userspace.
I doubt there is any Linux code out which is utilizing this
parisc-specific trap.

I'd suggest to add a new FPE trap si_code (e.g. FPE_CONDTRAP).
While at it, maybe we should include the already existing FPE_MDAOVF
from the frv architecture, so that arch/frv/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h
can go completely.

Suggested patch is below.

I'm willing to test the patch below on the parisc architecture for a few
weeks. And it will break arch/x86/kernel/signal_compat.c which needs
looking at then too.
Have you managed to test this change?
Sadly I haven't done any further testing yet.
 
I am sitting looking at another new FPE si_code and if this has been tested
I figure FPE_CONDTRAP should get the next available FPE si_code and the
other change should get the one that follows.
I'm fine either way. Do you have a git tree I can pull which includes
all your patches? I can then start testing.

Helge
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help