Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] signal: Move si_trapno into the _si_fault union

[Marco Elver]

On Sat, 1 May 2021 at 01:48, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Well with 7 patches instead of 3 that was a little more than I thought
> I was going to send.
>
> However that does demonstrate what I am thinking, and I think most of
> the changes are reasonable at this point.
>
> I am very curious how synchronous this all is, because if this code
> is truly synchronous updating signalfd to handle this class of signal
> doesn't really make sense.
>
> If the code is not synchronous using force_sig is questionable.
>
> Eric W. Biederman (7):
>       siginfo: Move si_trapno inside the union inside _si_fault
>       signal: Implement SIL_FAULT_TRAPNO
>       signal: Use dedicated helpers to send signals with si_trapno set
>       signal: Remove __ARCH_SI_TRAPNO
>       signal: Rename SIL_PERF_EVENT SIL_FAULT_PERF_EVENT for consistency
>       signal: Factor force_sig_perf out of perf_sigtrap
>       signal: Deliver all of the perf_data in si_perf

Thank you for doing this so quickly -- it looks much cleaner. I'll
have a more detailed look next week and also run some tests myself.

At a first glance, you've broken our tests in
tools/testing/selftests/perf_events/ -- needs a
s/si_perf/si_perf.data/, s/si_errno/si_perf.type/

Thanks!

-- Marco