Am 25.07.23 um 18:38 schrieb Linus Torvalds: > On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 at 04:16, Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> will end up without a vma and cause/log the segfault. Of course the >> process is already being killed, but I'd argue it is very confusing to >> users when apparent segfaults from such processes are being logged by >> the kernel. > > Ahh. Yes, that wasn't the intent. A process that is being killed > should exit with the lethal signal, not SIGSEGV. > Checking the status from waitpid, it does show that the process was terminated by signal 9, even if the segfault was logged. > But before we revert it, would you mind trying out the attached > trivial patch instead? > The patch works for me too :) (after adding the missing tsk argument like Thomas pointed out) > I'd also still be interested if the symptoms were anything else than > 'show_unhandled_signals' causing the show_signal_msg() dance, and > resulting in a message something like > > a.out[1567]: segfault at xyz ip [..] likely on CPU X > > in dmesg... > Yes, AFAICS, it is just those messages and nothing else. Best Regards, Fiona
