On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 09:33:17AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 2:42 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <li...@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, it does solve the problem at hand with strace - the exact patch I
> > tested against 4.16 is below.
> Ok, good.
> > However, FPE_FLTUNK is not defined in older kernels, so while we can
> > fix it this way for the current merge window, that doesn't help 4.16.
> I wonder if we should even bother with FPE_FLTUNK.
> I suspect we might as well use FPE_FLTINV, I suspect, and not have
> this complexity at all. That case is not worth worrying about, since
> it's a "this shouldn't happen anyway" and the *real* reason will be in
> the kernel logs due to vfs_panic().
> So it's not like this is something that the user should ever care
> about the si_code about.

Ack, my intended meaning for FPE_FLTUNK is that the fp exception is
either spurious or we can't tell easily (or possibly at all) which
FPE_XXX should be returned.  It's up to userspace to figure it out
if it really cares.  Previously we were accidentally returning SI_USER
in si_code for arm64.

This case on arm looks like a more serious error for which FPE_FLTINV
may be more appropriate anyway.



Reply via email to