Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:19:53 +0000 From: Mark Corbin <mark@...sco.co.uk> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] move riscv64 register index constants to signal.h On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 14:31:36 GMT Rich Felker wrote: > On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 09:26:31AM -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > > > > > I guess that it would probably be best to change the libsigsegv code > > > > > to > > > > > use a value of '2' instead of the REG_SP definition. I'll look at > > > > > submitting a patch to the project. > > > > > > > > I think using a symbolic name is both more informative and more > > > > portable (since the layout of the saved registers is an OS choice, > > > > nothing universal to the architecture). The question is just where the > > > > macro should be obtained from. As long as glibc (and any other > > > > platforms that might be relevant?) has a sys/reg.h, it wouldn't hurt > > > > to just add the include and continue using the macro, regardless of > > > > whether musl moves it later. > > > > > > Glibc and uClibc don't have a sys/reg.h - is there a way that it could > > > be > > > included conditionally for musl only? > > > > If you want a configure test to detect it the yes; otherwise no. But > > this suggests the way we did it is wrong. We should not be making this > > kind of mess. I should probably just move the definitions... > > Patch attached. Any objections? > > Rich Thanks Rich, that solves the problem.
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.