From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 28497 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2020 17:09:53 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 6 Dec 2020 17:09:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 10214 invoked by uid 550); 6 Dec 2020 17:09:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 10196 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2020 17:09:51 -0000 X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dereferenced.org; s=default; t=1607274625; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ciXR3Ok47OV/QrLjIbWiWfZSHZBZknmT+RgtXCuYgK0=; b=h79JVTwuZdh7FHlsVZ+/Qv/Vx0CqhLzHtWtzKN4z/7Fv124aNvxEQwe7sj2wp8TzhiQVMf ajuL96ExueQZF9hcoYdsyvHkqGC2J6HOjC5P4rpTjuQnto6rwQLAKNwgeIgKB7WUA5//pi xNyBSbvgZ7TC9pr/LcbCApq8yMqSoTY= From: Ariadne Conill To: Rich Felker Cc: Szabolcs Nagy , musl@lists.openwall.com, Drew DeVault Message-ID: <2178772.BdMzd0Z1jD@nanabozho> In-Reply-To: <20201206170647.GF534@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <3879728.LAGH0JGj17@nanabozho> <20201206170647.GF534@brightrain.aerifal.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-Migadu-Auth-User: ariadne@dereferenced.org Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2020 17:10:25 GMT Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH v2] riscv64: correct struct __ucontext name On Sunday, December 6, 2020 10:06:49 AM MST Rich Felker wrote: > On Sun, Dec 06, 2020 at 04:55:39PM +0000, Ariadne Conill wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Sunday, December 6, 2020 5:49:25 AM MST Drew DeVault wrote: > > > On Sun Dec 6, 2020 at 3:51 AM EST, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > > > * Drew DeVault [2020-12-05 18:10:06 +0000]: > > > > > This makes it consistent with other architectures and fixes some > > > > > issues > > > > > with downstream software. > > > > > > > > which software? > > > > > > > > glibc uses struct ucontext_t too and user code should use ucontext_t > > > > without struct. > > > > Some glibc architecture ports use the struct __ucontext and even struct > > ucontext names, or at least did in the past. > > > > > libucontext, which does use ucontext_t. > > > > > > In fact, the issue was more related to the type conflict with > > > ucontext.h, which declared struct __ucontext in the scope of its > > > function declarations due to the naming mismatch. > > > > glibc uses the POSIX 2004 standardized ucontext_t type in its public > > definitions. I believe musl should do the same. > > This produces a compile-time error is ucontext.h is included without > the right feature test macros, since signal.h will not have defined > ucontext_t in that case. That's why the public declarations must use > the struct tag. Bummer. In that case, I suggest musl use the same struct tag consistently. It should probably be struct ucontext_t for consistency with glibc. Ariadne