summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/siginfo.h
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* arm64: fpsimd: Fix bad si_code for undiagnosed SIGFPEDave Martin2018-03-201-7/+0
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Currently a SIGFPE delivered in response to a floating-point exception trap may have si_code set to 0 on arm64. As reported by Eric, this is a bad idea since this is the value of SI_USER -- yet this signal is definitely not the result of kill(2), tgkill(2) etc. and si_uid and si_pid make limited sense whereas we do want to yield a value for si_addr (which doesn't exist for SI_USER). It's not entirely clear whether the architecure permits a "spurious" fp exception trap where none of the exception flag bits in ESR_ELx is set. (IMHO the architectural intent is to forbid this.) However, it does permit those bits to contain garbage if the TFV bit in ESR_ELx is 0. That case isn't currently handled at all and may result in si_code == 0 or si_code containing a FPE_FLT* constant corresponding to an exception that did not in fact happen. There is nothing sensible we can return for si_code in such cases, but SI_USER is certainly not appropriate and will lead to violation of legitimate userspace assumptions. This patch allocates a new si_code value FPE_UNKNOWN that at least does not conflict with any existing SI_* or FPE_* code, and yields this in si_code for undiagnosable cases. This is probably the best simplicity/incorrectness tradeoff achieveable without relying on implementation-dependent features or adding a lot of code. In any case, there appears to be no perfect solution possible that would justify a lot of effort here. Yielding FPE_UNKNOWN when some well-defined fp exception caused the trap is a violation of POSIX, but this is forced by the architecture. We have no realistic prospect of yielding the correct code in such cases. At present I am not aware of any ARMv8 implementation that supports trapped floating-point exceptions in any case. The new code may be applicable to other architectures for similar reasons. No attempt is made to provide ESR_ELx to userspace in the signal frame, since architectural limitations mean that it is unlikely to provide much diagnostic value, doesn't benefit existing software and would create ABI with no proven purpose. The existing mechanism for passing it also has problems of its own which may result in the wrong value being passed to userspace due to interaction with mm faults. The implied rework does not appear justified. Acked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com> Reported-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com> Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
* arm64: signal: Ensure si_code is valid for all fault signalsDave Martin2018-03-091-14/+0
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Currently, as reported by Eric, an invalid si_code value 0 is passed in many signals delivered to userspace in response to faults and other kernel errors. Typically 0 is passed when the fault is insufficiently diagnosable or when there does not appear to be any sensible alternative value to choose. This appears to violate POSIX, and is intuitively wrong for at least two reasons arising from the fact that 0 == SI_USER: 1) si_code is a union selector, and SI_USER (and si_code <= 0 in general) implies the existence of a different set of fields (siginfo._kill) from that which exists for a fault signal (siginfo._sigfault). However, the code raising the signal typically writes only the _sigfault fields, and the _kill fields make no sense in this case. Thus when userspace sees si_code == 0 (SI_USER) it may legitimately inspect fields in the inactive union member _kill and obtain garbage as a result. There appears to be software in the wild relying on this, albeit generally only for printing diagnostic messages. 2) Software that wants to be robust against spurious signals may discard signals where si_code == SI_USER (or <= 0), or may filter such signals based on the si_uid and si_pid fields of siginfo._sigkill. In the case of fault signals, this means that important (and usually fatal) error conditions may be silently ignored. In practice, many of the faults for which arm64 passes si_code == 0 are undiagnosable conditions such as exceptions with syndrome values in ESR_ELx to which the architecture does not yet assign any meaning, or conditions indicative of a bug or error in the kernel or system and thus that are unrecoverable and should never occur in normal operation. The approach taken in this patch is to translate all such undiagnosable or "impossible" synchronous fault conditions to SIGKILL, since these are at least probably localisable to a single process. Some of these conditions should really result in a kernel panic, but due to the lack of diagnostic information it is difficult to be certain: this patch does not add any calls to panic(), but this could change later if justified. Although si_code will not reach userspace in the case of SIGKILL, it is still desirable to pass a nonzero value so that the common siginfo handling code can detect incorrect use of si_code == 0 without false positives. In this case the si_code dependent siginfo fields will not be correctly initialised, but since they are not passed to userspace I deem this not to matter. A few faults can reasonably occur in realistic userspace scenarios, and _should_ raise a regular, handleable (but perhaps not ignorable/blockable) signal: for these, this patch attempts to choose a suitable standard si_code value for the raised signal in each case instead of 0. arm64 was the only arch to define a BUS_FIXME code, so after this patch nobody defines it. This patch therefore also removes the relevant code from siginfo_layout(). Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> Reported-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
* signal/arm64: Document conflicts with SI_USER and SIGFPE,SIGTRAP,SIGBUSEric W. Biederman2018-01-121-0/+21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Setting si_code to 0 results in a userspace seeing an si_code of 0. This is the same si_code as SI_USER. Posix and common sense requires that SI_USER not be a signal specific si_code. As such this use of 0 for the si_code is a pretty horribly broken ABI. Further use of si_code == 0 guaranteed that copy_siginfo_to_user saw a value of __SI_KILL and now sees a value of SIL_KILL with the result that uid and pid fields are copied and which might copying the si_addr field by accident but certainly not by design. Making this a very flakey implementation. Utilizing FPE_FIXME, BUS_FIXME, TRAP_FIXME siginfo_layout will now return SIL_FAULT and the appropriate fields will be reliably copied. But folks this is a new and unique kind of bad. This is massively untested code bad. This is inventing new and unique was to get siginfo wrong bad. This is don't even think about Posix or what siginfo means bad. This is lots of eyeballs all missing the fact that the code does the wrong thing bad. This is getting stuck and keep making the same mistake bad. I really hope we can find a non userspace breaking fix for this on a port as new as arm64. Possible ABI fixes include: - Send the signal without siginfo - Don't generate a signal - Possibly assign and use an appropriate si_code - Don't handle cases which can't happen Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Cc: Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org> Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Ref: 53631b54c870 ("arm64: Floating point and SIMD") Ref: 32015c235603 ("arm64: exception: handle Synchronous External Abort") Ref: 1d18c47c735e ("arm64: MMU fault handling and page table management") Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
* License cleanup: add SPDX license identifier to uapi header files with a licenseGreg Kroah-Hartman2017-11-021-0/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Many user space API headers have licensing information, which is either incomplete, badly formatted or just a shorthand for referring to the license under which the file is supposed to be. This makes it hard for compliance tools to determine the correct license. Update these files with an SPDX license identifier. The identifier was chosen based on the license information in the file. GPL/LGPL licensed headers get the matching GPL/LGPL SPDX license identifier with the added 'WITH Linux-syscall-note' exception, which is the officially assigned exception identifier for the kernel syscall exception: NOTE! This copyright does *not* cover user programs that use kernel services by normal system calls - this is merely considered normal use of the kernel, and does *not* fall under the heading of "derived work". This exception makes it possible to include GPL headers into non GPL code, without confusing license compliance tools. Headers which have either explicit dual licensing or are just licensed under a non GPL license are updated with the corresponding SPDX identifier and the GPLv2 with syscall exception identifier. The format is: ((GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR SPDX-ID-OF-OTHER-LICENSE) SPDX license identifiers are a legally binding shorthand, which can be used instead of the full boiler plate text. The update does not remove existing license information as this has to be done on a case by case basis and the copyright holders might have to be consulted. This will happen in a separate step. This patch is based on work done by Thomas Gleixner and Kate Stewart and Philippe Ombredanne. See the previous patch in this series for the methodology of how this patch was researched. Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org> Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
* UAPI: (Scripted) Disintegrate arch/arm64/include/asmDavid Howells2012-10-111-0/+23
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Acked-by: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com> Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Acked-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
OpenPOWER on IntegriCloud