Re: signal delivery, was Re: reliable reproducer
Please try this patch. Signal delivery should only happen at insn
boundaries, but due to the way the 030 handles return from bus error
exceptions (the insn is resumed, not restarted like on the 040/060) the
kernel may do it in the middle of the faulting insn.
diff --git a/arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S b/arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S
index 4dd2fd7acba9..6c09a5710728 100644
--- a/arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S
+++ b/arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S
@@ -117,7 +117,11 @@ ENTRY(buserr)
movel %sp,%sp@- | stack frame pointer argument
jbsr buserr_c
addql #4,%sp
- jra ret_from_exception
+ | don't do signal delivery when interrupted while insn is in progress
+ | (on the 020/030)
+ tstl %d0
+ jeq ret_from_exception
+ RESTORE_ALL
ENTRY(trap)
SAVE_ALL_INT
diff --git a/arch/m68k/kernel/traps.c b/arch/m68k/kernel/traps.c
index a700807c9b6d..40fc408d1333 100644
--- a/arch/m68k/kernel/traps.c
+++ b/arch/m68k/kernel/traps.c
@@ -751,8 +751,10 @@ static inline void access_errorcf(unsigned int fs, struct frame *fp)
}
#endif /* CONFIG_COLDFIRE CONFIG_MMU */
-asmlinkage void buserr_c(struct frame *fp)
+asmlinkage int buserr_c(struct frame *fp)
{
+ int not_insn_boundary = 0;
+
/* Only set esp0 if coming from user mode */
if (user_mode(&fp->ptregs))
current->thread.esp0 = (unsigned long) fp;
@@ -793,8 +795,9 @@ asmlinkage void buserr_c(struct frame *fp)
break;
#endif
#if defined (CPU_M68020_OR_M68030)
- case 0xa:
case 0xb:
+ not_insn_boundary = 1;
+ case 0xa:
bus_error030 (fp);
break;
#endif
@@ -803,6 +806,8 @@ asmlinkage void buserr_c(struct frame *fp)
pr_debug("Unknown SIGSEGV - 4\n");
force_sig(SIGSEGV);
}
+
+ return not_insn_boundary;
}
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."
Reply to:
- References:
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Finn Thain <fthain@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Finn Thain <fthain@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
- From: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
- Re: signal delivery, was Re: reliable reproducer
- From: Finn Thain <fthain@linux-m68k.org>