Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] powerpc/traps: Print signal name for unhandled signals

[Murilo Opsfelder Araujo <muriloo@linux.ibm.com>]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 12:03:50AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-08-01 at 08:37 +0200, Christophe LEROY wrote:
> > Le 31/07/2018 à 16:50, Murilo Opsfelder Araujo a écrit :
> > > This adds a human-readable name in the unhandled signal message.
> > > Before this patch, a page fault looked like:
> > >    pandafault[6303]: unhandled signal 11 at 100007d0 nip 1000061c lr 7fff93c55100 code 2 in pandafault[10000000+10000]
> > > After this patch, a page fault looks like:
> > >    pandafault[6352]: segfault (11) at 13a2a09f8 nip 13a2a086c lr 7fffb63e5100 code 2 in pandafault[13a2a0000+10000]
> ]]
> > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
> []
> > > @@ -96,6 +96,41 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__debugger_fault_handler);
> > >   #define TM_DEBUG(x...) do { } while(0)
> > >   #endif
> > >
> > > +static const char *signames[SIGRTMIN + 1] = {
> > > +	"UNKNOWN",
> > > +	"SIGHUP",			// 1
> > > +	"SIGINT",			// 2
> []
> > I don't think is is worth having that full table when we only use a few
> > of them. (As discussed in v1 https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/948802/)
> >
> > I would suggest to instead use a function like this:
> >
> > static const char *signame(int signr)
> > {
> > 	if (signr == SIGBUS)
> > 		return "bus error";
> > 	if (signr == SIGFPE)
> > 		return "floating point exception";
> > 	if (signr == SIGILL)
> > 		return "illegal instruction";
> > 	if (signr == SIGILL)
> > 		return "segfault";
> > 	if (signr == SIGTRAP)
> > 		return "unhandled trap";
> > 	return "unknown signal";
> > }
>
> trivia:
>
> Unless the if tests are ordered most to least likely,
> perhaps it would be better to use a switch/case and
> let the compiler decide.
>
> 	switch (signr) {
> 	case SIGBUS:	return "bus error";
> 	case SIGFPE:	return "floating point exception";
> 	case SIGILL:	return "illegal instruction";
> 	case SIGSEGV:	return "segfault";
> 	case SIGTRAP:	return "unhandled trap";
> 	}
> 	return "unknown signal";
> }
>

Hi, Joe, Christophe.

That's a nice enhancement.  I'll do that in my next respin.

Cheers
Murilo