Re: [regression] x86/signal/64: Fix SS handling for signals delivered to 64-bit programs breaks dosemu
From: Stas Sergeev
Date: Thu Aug 13 2015 - 14:57:56 EST
13.08.2015 21:35, Linus Torvalds ÐÐÑÐÑ:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Stas Sergeev <stsp@xxxxxxx> wrote:
But OTOH these fields already lost their meaning.
Hello Linus, I verified that patch-minimal.diff is enough
Ok. So I'm inclined to do the bigger revert, just to fix the compile
to fix the problem, BUT! dosemu is in fact using the .fs and
.gs fields of sigcontext as a placeholders. Why the minimal
patch alone helps is simply because the kernel headers
installed in a system do not yet represent the newer kernel
developments and have the .fs and .gs fields in.
issue. It would be crazy to force some silly autoconf script for
random header info.
It may make sense to force people to stop using them,
in case you ever want to re-use them again in the future.
From what Andy says, it seems there are the distant plans
to start restoring FS again. If people still use sigcontext.fs
by that time, you'll get problems. If you force everyone to
stop using them - you'll be safe.
Also, at least in the past, resolving the compile-time problems
was up to the distributions: they always provided the "sanitized up"
version of kernel headers. Not sure what the current policy is...
In fact, here in Fedora-22, I have
that is straight from the kernel, but signal.h is instead using
a "sanitized up" version in
so the userspace compiles fine.
In fact, I think the "silly autoconf script" you mentioned above,
should indeed be reverted, and instead I should use
sigcontext.reserved1 array to store FS/GS? Is this
safer against ever re-using this space? Not sure...
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/