On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 11:39:35AM +0200, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

Catalin Marinas [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:07:05AM +0200, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

quoted

After these patches have had a chance to be reviewed I plan to merge
them by my siginfo tree.  If you would rather take them in the arm64
tree let me know.   All of the prerequisites should have been merged
through Linus's tree several releases ago.

Either way works for me. There is a trivial conflict in
force_signal_inject() with the arm64 for-next/core tree so I could as
well put them on top of this branch and send them during the 4.20
merging window.

As long as there is a trivial conflict I would like to keep everything
in one tree.

There is a following patchset that manages to reduce the size of struct
siginfo in the kernel that I have also posted for review.    With
everything in one tree I can make that change now, and just cross it off
my list of things to worry about.

Fine by me:

Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Tested-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

The conflict will appear in -next but the resolution is simple:

diff --cc arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
index 21689c6a985f,856b32aa03d8..adb0a32c1568

--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c

@@@ -353,12 -366,6 +368,9 @@@ void force_signal_inject(int signal, in
  	const char *desc;
  	struct pt_regs *regs = current_pt_regs();
  
 +	if (WARN_ON(!user_mode(regs)))
 +		return;
 +
- 	clear_siginfo(&info);
- 
  	switch (signal) {
  	case SIGILL:
  		desc = "undefined instruction";

-- 
Catalin