From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: (qmail 2541 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2020 08:12:11 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with UTF8ESMTPZ; 22 Apr 2020 08:12:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 19568 invoked by uid 550); 22 Apr 2020 08:12:09 -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 19544 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2020 08:12:08 -0000 From: Florian Weimer To: Nicholas Piggin Cc: Adhemerval Zanella , Rich Felker , David Laight , "libc-alpha\@sourceware.org" , "libc-dev\@lists.llvm.org" , "linuxppc-dev\@lists.ozlabs.org" , musl@lists.openwall.com, Segher Boessenkool References: <1586931450.ub4c8cq8dj.astroid@bobo.none> <20200415225539.GL11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20200416153756.GU11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <4b2a7a56-dd2b-1863-50e5-2f4cdbeef47c@linaro.org> <20200416175932.GZ11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <4f824a37-e660-8912-25aa-fde88d4b79f3@linaro.org> <20200416183151.GA11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1587344003.daumxvs1kh.astroid@bobo.none> <20200421143941.GJ11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <960127e0-57a0-55b4-f309-ae0a675c7756@linaro.org> <1587536988.ivnp421w2w.astroid@bobo.none> <874ktcng8z.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <1587540390.vde84z8edw.astroid@bobo.none> Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 10:11:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1587540390.vde84z8edw.astroid@bobo.none> (Nicholas Piggin's message of "Wed, 22 Apr 2020 17:31:07 +1000") Message-ID: <87imhslz22.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [musl] 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).