From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B86BC2D0E4 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:19:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6A4E2080A for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:19:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2387415AbgKWQRt (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:17:49 -0500 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:59876 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732638AbgKWQRt (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:17:49 -0500 Received: from in02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.52]) by out01.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1khEXA-00AmYV-1A; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 09:17:44 -0700 Received: from ip68-227-160-95.om.om.cox.net ([68.227.160.95] helo=x220.xmission.com) by in02.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1khEX9-002ZCM-0A; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 09:17:43 -0700 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Catalin Marinas Cc: Peter Collingbourne , Evgenii Stepanov , Kostya Serebryany , Vincenzo Frascino , Dave Martin , Will Deacon , Oleg Nesterov , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Linux ARM , Kevin Brodsky , Andrey Konovalov , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Helge Deller , David Spickett References: <13cf24d00ebdd8e1f55caf1821c7c29d54100191.1605904350.git.pcc@google.com> <87h7pj1ulp.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20201123114935.GD17833@gaia> <87y2isysra.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20201123155946.GA2438@gaia> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:17:20 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20201123155946.GA2438@gaia> (Catalin Marinas's message of "Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:59:47 +0000") Message-ID: <87sg90xd2n.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1khEX9-002ZCM-0A;;;mid=<87sg90xd2n.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=68.227.160.95;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX18erZ+UCQJB7rNjNglNN5M3m5mrrnkIt5s= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 68.227.160.95 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v21 1/2] signal: define the SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS bit in sa_flags X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Sat, 08 Feb 2020 21:53:50 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Catalin Marinas writes: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 09:53:13AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Catalin Marinas writes: >> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 05:22:58PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Peter Collingbourne writes: >> >> > Architectures that support address tagging, such as arm64, may want to >> >> > expose fault address tag bits to the signal handler to help diagnose >> >> > memory errors. However, these bits have not been previously set, >> >> > and their presence may confuse unaware user applications. Therefore, >> >> > introduce a SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS flag bit in sa_flags that a signal >> >> > handler may use to explicitly request that the bits are set. >> >> > >> >> > The generic signal handler APIs expect to receive tagged addresses. >> >> > Architectures may specify how to untag addresses in the case where >> >> > SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS is clear by defining the arch_untagged_si_addr >> >> > function. >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne >> >> > Acked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" >> >> > Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I16dd0ed2081f091fce97be0190cb8caa874c26cb >> >> > --- >> >> > To be applied on top of: >> >> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ebiederm/user-namespace.git signal-for-v5.11 >> >> >> >> I have merged this first patch into signal-for-v5.11 and pushed >> >> everything out to linux-next. >> > >> > Thank you Eric. Assuming this branch won't be rebased, I'll apply the >> > arm64 changes on top (well, if you rebase it, just let me know so that >> > we don't end up with duplicate commits in mainline). >> >> No. I won't be rebasing it. Not unless something serious problem shows >> up, and at that point I will be more likely to apply a corrective change >> on top that you can also grab. > > Thanks Eric. During the merging window, I'll probably wait for you to > send the pull request first just to keep the arm64 diffstat simpler. > > BTW, did you mean to base them on v5.10-rc3-391-g9cfd9c45994b or just > v5.10-rc3? It doesn't matter much as I'll generate the diffstat manually > anyway in my pull request as I have different bases in other branches. Crap. How did that happen? I thought for certain I had based them on v5.10-rc3. Some random git commit is not a good base. I think the better part of valor is to just admit I goofed and not rebase even now. It it would make your life easier I will be happy to rebase (onto v5.10-rc3?). I just wanted to get these into my tree so that we could incremetnally commit to the changes that makes sense and be certain not to loose them. Eric From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5E89C2D0E4 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:19:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F45820665 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:19:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="uvJoO69R" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4F45820665 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=xmission.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Subject:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=TgRJdOvX3ti/XnwE0lY7UB0Vym2XUvbYNVnsKv6Tc20=; b=uvJoO69Ri+x++GdmLNrK7uT5U txMtB1J96WflXef4sqMnvaVAA7OmCTbjKhTruaMIJtCJaaw08AaLw3CJt2/799GpOEblIV/F/QArE j09bUmyTKK9ZGKs1zPchl96IZlZ7seVGcM8o8cvAbcSvDNngi6Y5FuLFIa9YfwzdWuqHhvjl4iayG BVJCcS0/xh7jPNdp8+d/9Gtovz+RlT3TdtgNxNCXQTR6HxlutupSoKS0lNWhEF9UIZc0BUrg8KhI4 cXDHb8NZZZ1qi07KaY5RfQuMT7kNpDLxLZ4qN9HsluqXSy7M9hLDZ1UhIO1XgUWMusz/TCumyy4JS VrS7l8ciQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1khEXN-0005MP-RA; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:17:58 +0000 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1khEXK-0005LO-DF for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:17:55 +0000 Received: from in02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.52]) by out01.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1khEXA-00AmYV-1A; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 09:17:44 -0700 Received: from ip68-227-160-95.om.om.cox.net ([68.227.160.95] helo=x220.xmission.com) by in02.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1khEX9-002ZCM-0A; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 09:17:43 -0700 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Catalin Marinas References: <13cf24d00ebdd8e1f55caf1821c7c29d54100191.1605904350.git.pcc@google.com> <87h7pj1ulp.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20201123114935.GD17833@gaia> <87y2isysra.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20201123155946.GA2438@gaia> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:17:20 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20201123155946.GA2438@gaia> (Catalin Marinas's message of "Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:59:47 +0000") Message-ID: <87sg90xd2n.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-XM-SPF: eid=1khEX9-002ZCM-0A; ; ; mid=<87sg90xd2n.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>; ; ; hst=in02.mta.xmission.com; ; ; ip=68.227.160.95; ; ; frm=ebiederm@xmission.com; ; ; spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX18erZ+UCQJB7rNjNglNN5M3m5mrrnkIt5s= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 68.227.160.95 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v21 1/2] signal: define the SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS bit in sa_flags X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Sat, 08 Feb 2020 21:53:50 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201123_111754_491017_56F68070 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 23.26 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Peter Collingbourne , Helge Deller , Kevin Brodsky , Oleg Nesterov , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, "James E.J. Bottomley" , Kostya Serebryany , Linux ARM , Andrey Konovalov , David Spickett , Vincenzo Frascino , Will Deacon , Dave Martin , Evgenii Stepanov Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Catalin Marinas writes: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 09:53:13AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Catalin Marinas writes: >> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 05:22:58PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Peter Collingbourne writes: >> >> > Architectures that support address tagging, such as arm64, may want to >> >> > expose fault address tag bits to the signal handler to help diagnose >> >> > memory errors. However, these bits have not been previously set, >> >> > and their presence may confuse unaware user applications. Therefore, >> >> > introduce a SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS flag bit in sa_flags that a signal >> >> > handler may use to explicitly request that the bits are set. >> >> > >> >> > The generic signal handler APIs expect to receive tagged addresses. >> >> > Architectures may specify how to untag addresses in the case where >> >> > SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS is clear by defining the arch_untagged_si_addr >> >> > function. >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne >> >> > Acked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" >> >> > Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I16dd0ed2081f091fce97be0190cb8caa874c26cb >> >> > --- >> >> > To be applied on top of: >> >> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ebiederm/user-namespace.git signal-for-v5.11 >> >> >> >> I have merged this first patch into signal-for-v5.11 and pushed >> >> everything out to linux-next. >> > >> > Thank you Eric. Assuming this branch won't be rebased, I'll apply the >> > arm64 changes on top (well, if you rebase it, just let me know so that >> > we don't end up with duplicate commits in mainline). >> >> No. I won't be rebasing it. Not unless something serious problem shows >> up, and at that point I will be more likely to apply a corrective change >> on top that you can also grab. > > Thanks Eric. During the merging window, I'll probably wait for you to > send the pull request first just to keep the arm64 diffstat simpler. > > BTW, did you mean to base them on v5.10-rc3-391-g9cfd9c45994b or just > v5.10-rc3? It doesn't matter much as I'll generate the diffstat manually > anyway in my pull request as I have different bases in other branches. Crap. How did that happen? I thought for certain I had based them on v5.10-rc3. Some random git commit is not a good base. I think the better part of valor is to just admit I goofed and not rebase even now. It it would make your life easier I will be happy to rebase (onto v5.10-rc3?). I just wanted to get these into my tree so that we could incremetnally commit to the changes that makes sense and be certain not to loose them. Eric _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel