Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <YIpkvGrBFGlB5vNj@elver.google.com> <m11rat9f85.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
 <CAK8P3a0+uKYwL1NhY6Hvtieghba2hKYGD6hcKx5n8=4Gtt+pHA@mail.gmail.com>
 <m15z031z0a.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> <YIxVWkT03TqcJLY3@elver.google.com>
 <m1zgxfs7zq.fsf_-_@fess.ebiederm.org> <m1r1irpc5v.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
In-Reply-To: <m1r1irpc5v.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
From:   Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Date:   Sat, 1 May 2021 02:37:22 +0200
Message-ID: <CANpmjNNfiSgntiOzgMc5Y41KVAV_3VexdXCMADekbQEqSP3vqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] signal: Move si_trapno into the _si_fault union
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        sparclinux <sparclinux@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, 1 May 2021 at 01:48, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>
> Well with 7 patches instead of 3 that was a little more than I thought
> I was going to send.
>
> However that does demonstrate what I am thinking, and I think most of
> the changes are reasonable at this point.
>
> I am very curious how synchronous this all is, because if this code
> is truly synchronous updating signalfd to handle this class of signal
> doesn't really make sense.
>
> If the code is not synchronous using force_sig is questionable.
>
> Eric W. Biederman (7):
>       siginfo: Move si_trapno inside the union inside _si_fault
>       signal: Implement SIL_FAULT_TRAPNO
>       signal: Use dedicated helpers to send signals with si_trapno set
>       signal: Remove __ARCH_SI_TRAPNO
>       signal: Rename SIL_PERF_EVENT SIL_FAULT_PERF_EVENT for consistency
>       signal: Factor force_sig_perf out of perf_sigtrap
>       signal: Deliver all of the perf_data in si_perf

Thank you for doing this so quickly -- it looks much cleaner. I'll
have a more detailed look next week and also run some tests myself.

At a first glance, you've broken our tests in
tools/testing/selftests/perf_events/ -- needs a
s/si_perf/si_perf.data/, s/si_errno/si_perf.type/

Thanks!

-- Marco