[RFC PATCH 1/2] arm64: fpsimd: Fix bad si_code for undiagnosed SIGFPE
Dave Martin
Dave.Martin at arm.com
Wed Jan 24 01:53:44 PST 2018
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 01:44:19PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> David Miller <davem at davemloft.net> writes:
>
> > From: ebiederm at xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
> > Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 12:27:16 -0600
> >
> >> Dave Martin <Dave.Martin at arm.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 03:13:08PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >>> However, the purpose of this as an RFC was to get feedback on whether
> >>> adding FPE_UNKNOWN is considered acceptable at all from an API
> >>> perspective -- the precise number doesn't matter for that discussion.
> >>>
> >>> Do you have any view on this?
> >>
> >> That seems as good a solution as any too me. It is reality and it
> >> happens in the code and there are several places of the same form I
> >> would use it, just to get rid of the FPE_FIXME.
> >
> > Eric, feel free to do something similar on Sparc.
>
> Will do.
>
> This sounds like a good solution for this weird corner case, that
> appears on multiple architectures.
OK, I'll rebase my patches onto your tree (though trivial here) and
repost.
I'm still waiting for feeback on the Arm specifics, but FPE_UNKNOWN
could be picked up independently of that.
Cheers
---Dave
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list