[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:16:03 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fix risc64 user_regs_struct conflict with
kernel header
* Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> [2019-08-06 09:01:29 -0400]:
> On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 03:15:47PM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 06 2019, Rich Felker wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 08:51:14AM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > >> -struct user_regs_struct {
> > >> +struct _user_regs_struct {
> > >
> > > Does this agree with glibc naming?
> >
> > glibc riscv headers do not define user_regs_struct.
>
> Not even by including a kernel header that defines it? If so, then the
the glibc sys/user.h is empty on riscv.
user_regs_struct is declared in asm/ptrace.h in linux
but that's not included into libc headers on riscv.
i think musl's user.h should be empty too.
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.
