From: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/20] signal/sh: Use force_sig(SIGKILL) instead of do_group_exit(SIGKILL)
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 10:24:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211027142450.GV7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=whjqWwo16jtLduxb+0nbNetp8jNAz+go01wB4HGKX=jEQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 09:57:58AM -1000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 7:44 AM Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
> >
> > + force_sig(SIGKILL);
>
> I wonder if SIGFPE would be a more intuitive thing.
>
> Doesn't really matter, this is a "doesn't happen" event anyway, but
> that was just my reaction to reading the patch.
I think SIGKILL makes more sense unless there's a way the process
could handle the resulting SIGFPE and recover. I'd actually like to
see the lazy allocation of FPU state just removed (the amount of space
saved is tiny relative to the complexity cost and the negative aspects
of unrecoverable late failure) but for now let's just go with this.
Rich
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-27 14:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-20 17:32 [PATCH 00/20] exit cleanups Eric W. Biederman
2021-10-20 17:43 ` [PATCH 02/20] exit: Remove calls of do_exit after noreturn versions of die Eric W. Biederman
2021-10-21 16:02 ` Kees Cook
2021-10-21 16:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-10-20 17:43 ` [PATCH 06/20] signal/sh: Use force_sig(SIGKILL) instead of do_group_exit(SIGKILL) Eric W. Biederman
2021-10-20 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-10-27 14:24 ` Rich Felker [this message]
2021-10-21 16:08 ` Kees Cook
2021-10-20 21:51 ` [PATCH 21/20] signal: Replace force_sigsegv(SIGSEGV) with force_fatal_sig(SIGSEGV) Eric W. Biederman
2021-10-21 8:09 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2021-10-21 13:33 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-10-21 8:32 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
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=20211027142450.GV7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx \
--to=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).