Re: [PATCH v2] sigaction.2: Document SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS and the flag support detection protocol

["Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)" <alx.manpages@gmail.com>]

On 11/18/20 12:42 PM, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
> [[ Removed some CCs because gmail
>    didn't allow me to send it with so many CCs:
>    Kevin B., Andrey K., Helge D., David S.
> ]]
> 
> On 11/18/20 12:54 AM, Peter Collingbourne wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>
>> ---
>> These features are implemented in this patch series:
>>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/cover.1605235762.git.pcc@google.com/
>> which is still under review, so the patch should not be applied
>> yet.
>>
>> Alejandro, thanks for the review. Since the patch was almost
>> rewritten I didn't base this on your patch, instead I tried to
>> use the correct formatting in this patch.
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
> Fine.
> See below a small fix.

D'oh!
Fixing the CCs I forgot to add the fix to the code.
See below now.

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Alex
> 
>>
>> v2:
>> - fix formatting
>> - address feedback from Dave
>>
>>  man2/sigaction.2 | 125 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 125 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/man2/sigaction.2 b/man2/sigaction.2
>> index 6a8142324..0e4236a43 100644
>> --- a/man2/sigaction.2
>> +++ b/man2/sigaction.2
>> @@ -250,6 +250,44 @@ This flag is meaningful only when establishing a
> signal handler.
>>  .\" .I sa_sigaction
>>  .\" field was added in Linux 2.1.86.)
>>  .\"
>> +.TP
>> +.BR SA_UNSUPPORTED
>> +Used to dynamically probe for flag bit support.
>> +.IP
>> +If an attempt to register a handler succeeds with this flag set in
>> +.I act->sa_flags
>> +alongside other flags that are potentially unsupported by the kernel,
>> +and an immediately subsequent
>> +.BR sigaction ()
>> +call specifying the same signal number n and with non-NULL
>> +.I oldact
>> +yields
>> +.B SA_UNSUPPORTED
>> +.I clear
>> +in
>> +.IR oldact->sa_flags ,
>> +then
>> +.IR oldact->sa_flags

s/.IR/.I/

There's no roman part there.

>> +may be used as a bitmask
>> +describing which of the potentially unsupported flags are,
>> +in fact, supported.
>> +See the section "Dynamically probing for flag bit support"
>> +below for more details.
>> +.TP
>> +.BR SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS " (since Linux 5.x)"
>> +Normally, when delivering a signal,
>> +an architecture-specific set of tag bits are cleared from the
>> +.I si_addr
>> +field of
>> +.IR siginfo_t .
>> +If this flag is set,
>> +an architecture-specific subset of the tag bits will be preserved in
>> +.IR si_addr .
>> +.IP
>> +Programs that need to be compatible with Linux versions older than 5.x
>> +must use
>> +.B SA_UNSUPPORTED
>> +to probe for support.
>>  .SS The siginfo_t argument to a SA_SIGINFO handler
>>  When the
>>  .B SA_SIGINFO
>> @@ -833,6 +871,93 @@ Triggered by a
>>  .BR seccomp (2)
>>  filter rule.
>>  .RE
>> +.SS Dynamically probing for flag bit support
>> +The
>> +.BR sigaction ()
>> +call on Linux accepts unknown bits set in
>> +.I act->sa_flags
>> +without error.
>> +The behavior of the kernel starting with Linux 5.x is that a second
>> +.BR sigaction ()
>> +will clear unknown bits from
>> +.IR oldact->sa_flags .
>> +However, historically, a second
>> +.BR sigaction ()
>> +call would typically leave those bits set in
>> +.IR oldact->sa_flags .
>> +.PP
>> +This means that support for new flags cannot be detected
>> +simply by testing for a flag in
>> +.IR sa_flags ,
>> +and a program must test that
>> +.B SA_UNSUPPORTED
>> +has been cleared before relying on the contents of
>> +.IR sa_flags .
>> +.PP
>> +Since the behavior of the signal handler cannot be guaranteed
>> +unless the check passes,
>> +it is wise to either block the affected signal
>> +while registering the handler and performing the check in this case,
>> +or where this is not possible,
>> +for example if the signal is synchronous, to issue the second
>> +.BR sigaction ()
>> +in the signal handler itself.
>> +.PP
>> +In kernels that do not support a specific flag,
>> +the kernel's behavior is as if the flag was not set,
>> +even if the flag was set in
>> +.IR act->sa_flags .
>> +.PP
>> +The flags
>> +.BR SA_NOCLDSTOP ,
>> +.BR SA_NOCLDWAIT ,
>> +.BR SA_SIGINFO ,
>> +.BR SA_ONSTACK ,
>> +.BR SA_RESTART ,
>> +.BR SA_NODEFER ,
>> +.BR SA_RESETHAND ,
>> +and, if defined by the architecture,
>> +.B SA_RESTORER
>> +may not be reliably probed for using this mechanism,
>> +because they were introduced before Linux 5.x.
>> +However, in general, programs may assume that these flags are supported,
>> +since they have all been supported since Linux 2.6,
>> +which was released in the year 2003.
>> +.PP
>> +The following example program exits with status 0 if
>> +.B SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS
>> +is determined to be supported, and 1 otherwise.
>> +.PP
>> +.EX
>> +#include <signal.h>
>> +#include <stdio.h>
>> +#include <unistd.h>
>> +
>> +void handler(int signo, siginfo_t *info, void *context) {
>> +  struct sigaction oldact;
>> +  if (sigaction(SIGSEGV, 0, &oldact) == 0 &&
>> +      !(oldact.sa_flags & SA_UNSUPPORTED) &&
>> +      (oldact.sa_flags & SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS)) {
>> +    _exit(0);
>> +  } else {
>> +    _exit(1);
>> +  }
>> +}
>> +
>> +int main(void) {
>> +  struct sigaction act = {};
>> +  act.sa_flags = SA_SIGINFO | SA_UNSUPPORTED | SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS;
>> +  act.sa_sigaction = handler;
>> +  if (sigaction(SIGSEGV, &act, 0) != 0) {
>> +    perror("sigaction");
>> +    return 1;
>> +  }
>> +
>> +  /* Force a SIGSEGV. */
>> +  *(volatile int *)0 = 0;
>> +  return 1;
>> +}
>> +.EE
>>  .SH RETURN VALUE
>>  .BR sigaction ()
>>  returns 0 on success; on error, \-1 is returned, and
>>

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel