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 26008 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2020 16:55:11 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 6 Dec 2020 16:55:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 3277 invoked by uid 550); 6 Dec 2020 16:55:06 -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 3254 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2020 16:55:06 -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=1607273739; 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=MH7uXZSL35DG+BUFKOdcmWCVoeuPsd4Nk2vFfmtUrIg=; b=cXD8bBKWduY1nkxlKsiA4YXT+Hr97K/812ZdjlEUkDA+8q0ELRV+fFvpJKFJWgZBjcLviK IsO9P2k/aw4Fz60v1WnL2XBvJG3w6B7vUmWLt+JIGooI784VUW+Hv/qif+Sr87BbkUYB+x HBb+nrX5vA2N5cpHUNmMOvCnA5QJaD0= From: Ariadne Conill To: Szabolcs Nagy , musl@lists.openwall.com Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com, Drew DeVault Message-ID: <3879728.LAGH0JGj17@nanabozho> In-Reply-To: References: 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 16:55:39 GMT Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH v2] riscv64: correct struct __ucontext name 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. As far as libucontext goes, this is increasingly moot because 0.13 will introduce freestanding mode which avoids the musl definitions entirely, instead using simplified (though ABI compatible) definitions, allowing it to not only be used on musl but on other libc and other OS entirely (for example, it is known to now build on AmigaOS and Darwin). libucontext using its own definitions is an important step toward eventually taking ucontext.h out of musl entirely, and providing it in libucontext instead, too, which I think musl should do since the ucontext API was dropped from POSIX. But right now, I think the best way forward is to leave the architecture headers alone and just fix the ucontext.h definitions instead. I can send a patch doing that if you want to focus on other things. Ariadne