Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 10:11:49 +0200 From: Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de> To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com> Cc: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org>, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>, "libc-alpha\@sourceware.org" <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>, "libc-dev\@lists.llvm.org" <libc-dev@...ts.llvm.org>, "linuxppc-dev\@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, musl@...ts.openwall.com, Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org> Subject: Re: Re: Powerpc Linux 'scv' system call ABI proposal take 2 * Nicholas Piggin: > 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? No, SIGILL seems fine to me. scv 0 and scv 1 could well be considered different instructions eventually (with different mnemonics).
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.