Re: [REVIEW][PATCHv2 03/26] signal/arm64: Use force_sig not force_sig_fault for SIGKILL

[Eric W. Biederman]

Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> writes:

> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 03:59:20PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> writes:
>> 
>> > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:11:19AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
>> >> index ade32046f3fe..e45d5b440fb1 100644
>> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
>> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
>> >> @@ -256,7 +256,10 @@ void arm64_force_sig_fault(int signo, int code, void __user *addr,
>> >>  			   const char *str)
>> >>  {
>> >>  	arm64_show_signal(signo, str);
>> >> -	force_sig_fault(signo, code, addr, current);
>> >> +	if (signo == SIGKILL)
>> >> +		force_sig(SIGKILL, current);
>> >> +	else
>> >> +		force_sig_fault(signo, code, addr, current);
>> >>  }
>> >
>> > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > Are you planning to send this series on, or would you like me to pick this
>> > into the arm64 tree?
>> 
>> I am planning on taking this through siginfo tree, unless it causes
>> problems.
>
> Okey doke, it would just be nice to see this patch land in 5.2, that's
> all.

As this does not appear to have any real world consequences I am aiming
at 5.3.  If someone else would like to take it and feed it to Linus
sooner I won't object.

Eric