From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Weimer Subject: Re: [PATCH] pkeys: Introduce PKEY_ALLOC_SIGNALINHERIT and change signal semantics Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:47:17 +0200 Message-ID: <0bd6584e-f520-9e2d-8adb-f79d3d7e9340@redhat.com> References: <20180502132751.05B9F401F3041@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <248faadb-e484-806f-1485-c34a72a9ca0b@intel.com> <822a28c9-5405-68c2-11bf-0c282887466d@redhat.com> <20180502211254.GA5863@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> <20180502233848.GB5863@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180502233848.GB5863@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+glppe-linuxppc-embedded-2=m.gmane.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" To: Ram Pai , Andy Lutomirski Cc: linux-arch , Linux-MM , Linux API , X86 ML , Dave Hansen , linux-x86_64@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 05/03/2018 01:38 AM, Ram Pai wrote: > This is a new requirement that I was not aware off. Its not documented > anywhere AFAICT. Correct. All inheritance behavior was deliberately left unspecified. I'm surprised about the reluctance to fix the x86 behavior. Are there any applications at all for the current semantics? I guess I can implement this particular glibc hardening on POWER only for now. Thanks, Florian From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:46018 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751147AbeEGJrV (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 May 2018 05:47:21 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] pkeys: Introduce PKEY_ALLOC_SIGNALINHERIT and change signal semantics References: <20180502132751.05B9F401F3041@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <248faadb-e484-806f-1485-c34a72a9ca0b@intel.com> <822a28c9-5405-68c2-11bf-0c282887466d@redhat.com> <20180502211254.GA5863@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> <20180502233848.GB5863@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> From: Florian Weimer Message-ID: <0bd6584e-f520-9e2d-8adb-f79d3d7e9340@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:47:17 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180502233848.GB5863@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ram Pai , Andy Lutomirski Cc: Dave Hansen , Linux-MM , Linux API , linux-x86_64@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch , X86 ML , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Message-ID: <20180507094717.4Bt3yXQOer4QoDunAX7B_pAobK69ha4W-s7ri4stZfg@z> On 05/03/2018 01:38 AM, Ram Pai wrote: > This is a new requirement that I was not aware off. Its not documented > anywhere AFAICT. Correct. All inheritance behavior was deliberately left unspecified. I'm surprised about the reluctance to fix the x86 behavior. Are there any applications at all for the current semantics? I guess I can implement this particular glibc hardening on POWER only for now. Thanks, Florian