On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 07:38:53PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > It really only matters to debuggers but the SIGKILL does not have any > si_codes that use the fault member of the siginfo union. Correct this > the simple way and call force_sig instead of force_sig_fault when the > signal is SIGKILL. > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@xxxxxxx> > Cc: James Morse <james.morse@xxxxxxx> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> > Fixes: af40ff687bc9 ("arm64: signal: Ensure si_code is valid for all fault signals") > Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c > index ade32046f3fe..0feb17bdcaa0 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c > @@ -282,6 +282,11 @@ void arm64_notify_die(const char *str, struct pt_regs *regs, > current->thread.fault_address = 0; > current->thread.fault_code = err; > > + if (signo == SIGKILL) { > + arm64_show_signal(signo, str); > + force_sig(signo, current); > + return; > + } I know it's a bit of a misnomer, but I'd rather do this check inside arm64_force_sig_fault, since I think we have other callers (e.g. do_bad_area()) which also blindly pass in SIGKILL here. We could rename the thing if necessary. Will