Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.15 118/124] signal/parisc: Document a conflict with SI_USER with SIGFPE

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Hey Eric,
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:20:21AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>What is the justification for backporting this and the other similar
>>Documentation commits?
>
> It was flagged as a bug fixing patch by a new process we're testing, and
> when I looked at it I thought that the commit message suggests it fixes
> an ABI issue.

Unfortunately they just reveal an ABI issue.  I believe there are some
fixes coming but given that the issues are a decade old in many cases
actually fixing these things must be approach with care so as not to
create regressions.

>>These commits just introduce a define _FIXME with value of 0, to
>>document that the userspace ABI was handled incorrectly long ago.
>>
>>These commits do not fix anything.  Thes commits do not change anything
>>except a little how they are handled in siginfo_layout.  And I don't see
>>the changes that introduce siginfo_layout in kernel/signal.c being
>>backported.
>>
>>Further these commits don't even have a fixes tag so I am curious
>>what is triggering them for backport.
>
> We're testing out a new mechanism where we train a neural network to
> detect bug fixing patches and flag them for manual review. We're working
> on a FAQ + more detailed information right now.

The neural network did seem to pick up on something that is worth
looking at.

Eric



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]