Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] x86, pkeys: fix siginfo ABI breakage from new field

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 09:13:31 +1100

Hi Dave,

On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 11:49:31 -0800 Dave Hansen <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> This responds to the feedback from Ingo that we should be using
> explicitly-sized types.

Beat me to it by seconds :-)

> From: Dave Hansen <[email-masked]>
> 
> Stephen Rothwell reported:
> 
> 	http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email-masked]
> 
> that the Memory Protection Keys patches from the tip tree broke
> a build-time check on an ARM build because they changed the ABI
> of siginfo.
> 
> A u64 was used for the protection key field in siginfo.  When the
> containing union was aligned, this u64 unioned nicely with the
> two 'void *'s in _addr_bnd.  But, on 32-bit, if the union was
> unaligned, the u64 might grow the size of the union, breaking the
> ABI for subsequent fields.
> 
> To fix this, we replace the u64 with an 'unsigned long'.  The long
> is guaranteed to union well with the pointers from _addr_bnd.  It
> is also plenty large enough to store the 16-bit pkey we have today
> on x86.  This also has the advantage that it allows existing 64-bit
> userspace to keep working without modification.

s/(unsigned )?long/__u32/g
and the last sentence no longer makes sense.

> I also shouldn't have been using a u64 in a userspace API to begin
> with.
> 
> Fixes: cd0ea35ff551 ("signals, pkeys: Notify userspace about protection key faults")
> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <[email-masked]>
> Cc: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <[email-masked]>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email-masked]>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <[email-masked]>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email-masked]>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Cc: Helge Deller <[email-masked]>

Acked-by: Stehen Rothwell <[email-masked]>

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell