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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 3176 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2022 17:27:14 -0000 Received: from second.openwall.net (193.110.157.125) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 10 Nov 2022 17:27:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 5566 invoked by uid 550); 10 Nov 2022 17:27:11 -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 5530 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2022 17:27:10 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=lVb1emMqIypBewet+8/VeAQv3+yUSt0wlR4FimR9QeA=; b=AygnPQMsibl1FlPi6zHZE8OgTkkmcOIAE3P2ootsT4Q8r6QaBzCiFBNmOHAg1jXyZg mPAKhLt/mm+DfzV0j3NizfgROXsnWJm+LD52nDISD9k6uz6dLNKQk4igmFVqe1LLMpsl ZFgg2JNhxnE3lhIS+PejOZmpdD56yUQNveLS5zb39MixVS0R1c+oIJiUiEtvbQUMaesw OkNCbY7SAiugumsGltYvKAtm5Cl7mnkP6zeH4LAbD60D8fXv9czaK3Lj18hzK8yYWTzM VHT4RAMEHjeZCn51Ks+ALdEHclQMy45Ig9gUDTZVnMY2vu6kxIut5mt2/z1/dgDnIamr gBhA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=lVb1emMqIypBewet+8/VeAQv3+yUSt0wlR4FimR9QeA=; b=GQ8haQbWiTbKYNDbx9neUW16sdtPn7S4BYhlHOA2z2U5NqjHUIGY7AgB6l+9bB8MUh Yhzp3P0MFzJrQyR/OY35gohviuXedwItsLfac463oW4OyjBWnBcnI31g72QcOOFFD5hR 9A/A9Okck+6UPjbkDs2EYtWADDMtRjZM7TOemIHyRWZyHaBTfQZM6xcdLnhdmrdLeo2k Kp1ELObTB0PxcUhLh0ktsIRfU5xamfmZkwCXPFOY0c9M7CGJNbufHGBWIGBiU7CRQHEh 3MnKkTykSFA5nm6kLBvj8v7nn8zNS7HLVHYp8Zla9GqCG2dlJ9DPIyK+BxyOFsjafJBb Y44g== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0+JK/3jHITkhy5TBawyep0r6W2QTioT3e7lEnDDd/Xx5Iqt+Qz znwj4pXcl0SwoRPVB7D0SpGdbUUhO9YxU56KvQIQNw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6ZTLyC0eG0xXvqrCUUmM0E8oanYZoTYbSn6UHCPSzofLGw6LOsyB+fWCBFohentQIKJHrEHyDTOHDMphiqB78= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7f83:0:b0:3a5:7482:cce with SMTP id z3-20020ac87f83000000b003a574820ccemr24375714qtj.170.1668101218861; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 09:26:58 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20221110171858.GJ29905@brightrain.aerifal.cx> In-Reply-To: <20221110171858.GJ29905@brightrain.aerifal.cx> From: enh Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 09:26:47 -0800 Message-ID: To: dalias@libc.org Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000099dd1405ed211444" Subject: Re: [musl] SA_RESTORER for rv64? --00000000000099dd1405ed211444 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 9:19 AM Rich Felker wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 07:44:23AM -0800, enh wrote: > > arch/riscv64/bits/signal.h has contained a definition for SA_RESTORER > since > > the initial commit, but i think that's just copy & paste from whichever > > architecture the rv64 headers were based on? the linux kernel itself > > doesn't have SA_RESTORER for rv64, unless i'm missing something? > > I suspect this is just a mistake. Have you seen any ill effects from > it? If riscv folks can confirm it's wrong, I'll remove it. > i noticed this by inspection after someone had some code that (correctly) didn't compile with bionic or glibc but did with musl. in addition to rejecting the proposal to add a rv64 SA_RESTORER to bionic, i said i'd reach out to musl about removing it there :-) > Rich > --00000000000099dd1405ed211444 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 9:19 AM Rich = Felker <dalias@libc.org> wrote= :
On Thu, Nov 10= , 2022 at 07:44:23AM -0800, enh wrote:
> arch/riscv64/bits/signal.h has contained a definition for SA_RESTORER = since
> the initial commit, but i think that's just copy & paste from = whichever
> architecture the rv64 headers were based on? the linux kernel itself > doesn't have SA_RESTORER for rv64, unless i'm missing somethin= g?

I suspect this is just a mistake. Have you seen any ill effects from
it? If riscv folks can confirm it's wrong, I'll remove it.

i noticed this by inspection after someone had = some code that (correctly) didn't compile with bionic or glibc but did = with musl. in addition to rejecting the proposal to add a rv64 SA_RESTORER = to bionic, i said i'd reach out to musl about removing it there :-)
=C2=A0
Rich
--00000000000099dd1405ed211444--