From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C099CECE564 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 21:10:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D5AA2146D for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 21:10:33 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6D5AA2146D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xmission.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730325AbeISCo4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Sep 2018 22:44:56 -0400 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:51145 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726821AbeISCo4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Sep 2018 22:44:56 -0400 Received: from in01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.51]) by out01.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1g2NGQ-0007RN-Uy; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:10:30 -0600 Received: from [105.184.227.67] (helo=x220.xmission.com) by in01.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1g2NGA-0001XO-MX; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:10:30 -0600 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , x86@kernel.org References: <87y3bzk6yv.fsf@xmission.com> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 23:10:06 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Thomas Gleixner's message of "Tue, 18 Sep 2018 22:55:08 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: <87zhweh5qp.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1g2NGA-0001XO-MX;;;mid=<87zhweh5qp.fsf@xmission.com>;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=105.184.227.67;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1+pZQAaEj/6O8tJlh5tXjS7/lm3FPBqfeQ= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 105.184.227.67 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: [REVIEW][PATCH 00/20] siginfo cleanups for x86 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Thomas Gleixner writes: > On Tue, 18 Sep 2018, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> I have been slowly going thought and reworking the arch specific >> functions that generate siginfo. The problems I have been addressing >> is that using siginfo directly is error prone. Using siginfo directly >> makes it easy to leave fields initialized, and get confused about >> which fields need to be filled in. >> >> To address this I have added a series of helper functions to >> kernel/signal.c, that are specific to exactly one use of struct siginfo >> and take the parameters they need. >> >> To use these functions the x86 signal handling needs some cleanups but >> the net result appears to be less code that is easier to follow. >> >> If while looking over these patches you see anything please let me know. > > Only nitpicks. > >> I don't think I missed something but to err is human. > > I went through the changes a couple of times, but failed to spot > something. Was pleasure to read that set! > >> Likewise if you would like to merge these patches via the tip tree >> let me know. Otherwise after the review is complete I plan on merging >> these into my siginfo tree. At this point I believe all of the >> prerequisite patches are merged so it should not make a difference. > > Works either way. Ingo? If I manage to get through all of the architecture specific code I can shrink the in-kernel version of struct siginfo. So there is a slight advantage to having it all in my tree. But worst case I just have to wait another cycle which doesn't look like a particularly long wait at this point. Eric