Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 05:27:10 +0200 From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] add powerpc64 port * Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> [2016-03-27 22:18:56 -0400]: > On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 07:32:20PM -0500, Bobby Bingham wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 07:37:09PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 04:20:19PM -0500, Bobby Bingham wrote: > > > > +#define SA_NOCLDSTOP 1U > > > > +#define SA_NOCLDWAIT 2U > > > > +#define SA_SIGINFO 4U > > > > +#define SA_ONSTACK 0x08000000U > > > > +#define SA_RESTART 0x10000000U > > > > +#define SA_NODEFER 0x40000000U > > > > +#define SA_RESETHAND 0x80000000U i guess at least this one has to be unsigned and then others should follow i think there are other cases where a 1U<<31 flag forces all others to be unsigned otherwise there are possible signed int overflow issues (even though the linux uapi may use signed int) e.g. EPOLL* in sys/epoll.h MS_NOUSER in sys/mount.h ? > > > > +#define SA_RESTORER 0x04000000U > > > > > > Is there a reason for making these unsigned? It's different from other > > > archs at least, I think. > > > > It's the same as the ppc32 port. > > OK. Maybe it should be changed but that's a separate issue. >
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.