[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230404170635.GJ3630668@port70.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2023 19:06:35 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: 王洪亮 <wanghongliang@...ngson.cn>
Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: add loongarch64 port v6.
* 王洪亮 <wanghongliang@...ngson.cn> [2023-04-04 17:46:36 +0800]:
> 在 2023/4/3 下午11:44, Szabolcs Nagy 写道:
> > i was asking because of this glibc patch:
> > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2023-April/146897.html
> >
> > i dont understand that change (loongarch is in glibc since 2.36 release).
>
> Based on the v6 patch,I Modified the member names of struct sigcontext to
> maintain
> consistency with kernel and glibc. As shown in
(1) if _XOPEN_SOURCE && !_GNU_SOURCE && !_BSD_SOURCE mcontext_t fields
need not be accessible and must be in the impl reserved namespace
(no glibc or linux api compat requirement, only posix namespace req).
(2) otherwise musl mcontext_t fields must match glibc.
(ucontext and mcontext_t must use the same api across libcs).
i think it does not matter if the fields are different from the linux
uapi sigcontext fields. glibc used to include linux asm/sigcontext.h
to define mcontext_t so the fields were the same, but that polluted
the namespace and got fixed a while ago:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21457
since then mcontext_t is not the same as struct sigcontext, but
even before that they should not have been used interchangably
in c apis (the c abi must match though).
so i would not change the glibc code to match linux. and update the
musl patch to match current glibc api. the only wart i see is that
all targets currently have an uc_flags field in ucontext, loongarch
has an __uc_flags, but i think that's fine if there is no portable
use of this field. you may want to look into that, but it can be
fixed with a #define uc_flags __uc_flags if needed.
the glibc loongarch maintainers can break their api (and c++ abi) if
they wish to make it consistent with linux uapi, but i don't think
that's very useful. i'd wait for the glibc patch to be resolved and
fix musl patches accordingly. the v6 patches currently violate both
(1) and (2) requirements.
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.
