Setting si_code to __SI_FAULT 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.
This was introduced in 2.3.41 so this mess has had a long time for
people to be able to start depending on it.
As this bug has existed for 17 years already I don't know if it is
worth fixing. It is definitely worth documenting what is going
on so that no one decides to copy this bad decision.
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: sparclinux@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
#define SI_NOINFO 32767 /* no information in siginfo_t */
+/*
+ * SIGFPE si_codes
+ */
+#ifdef __KERNEL__
+#define FPE_FIXME (__SI_FAULT|0) /* Broken dup of SI_USER */
+#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
+
/*
* SIGEMT si_codes
*/
info.si_errno = 0;
info.si_addr = (void __user *)pc;
info.si_trapno = 0;
- info.si_code = __SI_FAULT;
+ info.si_code = FPE_FIXME;
if ((fsr & 0x1c000) == (1 << 14)) {
if (fsr & 0x10)
info.si_code = FPE_FLTINV;
info.si_errno = 0;
info.si_addr = (void __user *)regs->tpc;
info.si_trapno = 0;
- info.si_code = __SI_FAULT;
+ info.si_code = FPE_FIXME;
if ((fsr & 0x1c000) == (1 << 14)) {
if (fsr & 0x10)
info.si_code = FPE_FLTINV;