Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20181128193636.254378-1-brendanhiggins@google.com>
 <20181128193636.254378-9-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20181130034135.GN18410@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com>
In-Reply-To: <20181130034135.GN18410@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com>
From:   Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 3 Dec 2018 15:37:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAFd5g45+1wHteYs5YiL19x=L=g=oab5uJrabdKO8q_jS4-ojbg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 08/19] arch: um: add shim to trap to allow installing a
 fault catcher for tests
To:     mcgrof@kernel.org
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@google.com>, shuah@kernel.org,
        Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
        joe@perches.com, brakmo@fb.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        Tim.Bird@sony.com, khilman@baylibre.com,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        jdike@addtoit.com, richard@nod.at, linux-um@lists.infradead.org,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        dan.j.williams@intel.com, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org,
        kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
        Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:41 PM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:25AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > +static void segv_run_catcher(jmp_buf *catcher, void *fault_addr)
> > +{
> > +     current->thread.fault_addr = fault_addr;
> > +     UML_LONGJMP(catcher, 1);
> > +}
>
> Some documentation about what this does exactly would be appreciated.
> With the goal it may be useful to others wanting to consider support
> for other archs -- if that actually ends up being desirable.

Yeah, I should. Should this go in the wrapper around the abort() hack?
Or do you think I should write some documentation on how KUnit works
under Documentation/ ?