Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 17:31:07 +1000
From: Nicholas Piggin <>
To: Florian Weimer <>
Cc: Adhemerval Zanella <>, Rich Felker
	<>, David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,, Segher Boessenkool <>
Subject: Re: Re: Powerpc Linux 'scv' system call ABI proposal take 2

Excerpts from Florian Weimer's message of April 22, 2020 5:15 pm:
> * Nicholas Piggin:
>> Another option would be to use a different signal. I don't see that any 
>> are more suitable.
> SIGSYS comes to my mind.  But I don't know how exclusively it is
> associated with seccomp these days.

SIGSYS is entirely seccomp now. There looks like a single obscure MIPS 
user of it in Linux that's not seccomp, but it would be entirely new for 
powerpc (or any of the common platforms, arm, x86 etc).

So I would be disinclined to use SIGSYS unless there are no other better 
signal types, and we don't want to use SIGILL for some good reason -- is 
there a good reason to add complexity for userspace by differentiating 
these two situations?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.