Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 05:22:58PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Peter Collingbourne <pcc@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > Architectures that support address tagging, such as arm64, may want to >> > expose fault address tag bits to the signal handler to help diagnose >> > memory errors. However, these bits have not been previously set, >> > and their presence may confuse unaware user applications. Therefore, >> > introduce a SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS flag bit in sa_flags that a signal >> > handler may use to explicitly request that the bits are set. >> > >> > The generic signal handler APIs expect to receive tagged addresses. >> > Architectures may specify how to untag addresses in the case where >> > SA_EXPOSE_TAGBITS is clear by defining the arch_untagged_si_addr >> > function. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > Acked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I16dd0ed2081f091fce97be0190cb8caa874c26cb >> > --- >> > To be applied on top of: >> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ebiederm/user-namespace.git signal-for-v5.11 >> >> I have merged this first patch into signal-for-v5.11 and pushed >> everything out to linux-next. > > Thank you Eric. Assuming this branch won't be rebased, I'll apply the > arm64 changes on top (well, if you rebase it, just let me know so that > we don't end up with duplicate commits in mainline). No. I won't be rebasing it. Not unless something serious problem shows up, and at that point I will be more likely to apply a corrective change on top that you can also grab. Eric
