Re: [PATCH 21/20] signal: Replace force_sigsegv(SIGSEGV) with force_fatal_sig(SIGSEGV)

[Eric W. Biederman]

Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Hi Eric,
>
> Patch 21/20?

In reviewing another part of the patchset Linus asked if force_sigsegv
could go away.  It can't completely but I can get this far.

Given that it is just a cleanup it makes most sense to me as an
additional patch on top of what is already here.


> On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 11:52 PM Eric W. Biederman
> <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Now that force_fatal_sig exists it is unnecessary and a bit confusing
>> to use force_sigsegv in cases where the simpler force_fatal_sig is
>> wanted.  So change every instance we can to make the code clearer.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>>  arch/m68k/kernel/traps.c        | 2 +-
>
> Acked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thank you.

Eric