From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Edmund Grimley-Evans <Edmund.Grimley-Evans@arm.com>,
libc-alpha@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: signal: Fix unparseable iwmmxt_sigframe in uc_regspace[]
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 22:08:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170627220812.GT4902@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1498583067-14178-3-git-send-email-Dave.Martin@arm.com>
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 06:04:07PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> In kernels with CONFIG_IWMMXT=y running on non-iWMMXt hardware, the
> signal frame can be left partially uninitialised in such a way
> that userspace cannot parse uc_regspace[] safely. In particular,
> this means that the VFP registers cannot be located reliably in the
> signal frame when a multi_v7_defconfig kernel is run on the
> majority of platforms.
>
> The cause is that the uc_regspace[] is laid out statically based on
> the kernel config, but the decision of whether to save/restore the
> iWMMXt registers must be a runtime decision.
>
> To minimise breakage of software that may assume a fixed layout,
> this patch emits a dummy block of the same size as iwmmxt_sigframe,
> for non-iWMMXt threads. However, the magic and size of this block
> are now filled in to help parsers skip over it. A new DUMMY_MAGIC
> is defined for this purpose.
>
> It is probably legitimate (if non-portable) for userspace to
> manufacture its own sigframe for sigreturn, and there is no obvious
> reason why userspace should be required to insert a DUMMY_MAGIC
> block when running on non-iWMMXt hardware, when omitting it has
> worked just fine forever in other configurations. So in this case,
> sigreturn does not require this block to be present.
>
> Reported-by: Edmund Grimley-Evans <Edmund.Grimley-Evans@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
This looks fine to me. Please drop it in the patch system, thanks.
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-27 22:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-27 17:05 [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] ARM: Fix unparseable signal frame with CONFIG_IWMMXT Dave Martin
2017-06-27 17:05 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: signal: Fix unparseable iwmmxt_sigframe in uc_regspace[] Dave Martin
2017-06-27 22:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2017-06-28 13:09 ` Dave Martin
2017-06-27 17:05 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/2] ARM: iwmmxt: Add missing __user annotations to sigframe accessors Dave Martin
2017-06-27 22:06 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170627220812.GT4902@n2100.armlinux.org.uk \
--to=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=Edmund.Grimley-Evans@arm.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox