[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] linux-user/alpha: Rename the sigaction restorer field
From: |
Alex Bennée |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] linux-user/alpha: Rename the sigaction restorer field |
Date: |
Fri, 23 Apr 2021 11:16:15 +0100 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.5.11; emacs 28.0.50 |
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> writes:
> Use ka_restorer, in line with TARGET_ARCH_HAS_KA_RESTORER
> vs TARGET_ARCH_HAS_SA_RESTORER, since Alpha passes this
> field as a syscall argument.
I'm still slightly confused - but that's to be expected from signals :-/
Anyway I understand that the SA_RESTORER points to the vdso trampoline
(at least according to man sigreturn). What is ka_restorer - if this the
in sigframe restorer?
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
> ---
> linux-user/syscall_defs.h | 2 +-
> linux-user/alpha/signal.c | 8 ++++----
> linux-user/syscall.c | 4 ++--
> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/linux-user/syscall_defs.h b/linux-user/syscall_defs.h
> index 25be414727..693d4f3788 100644
> --- a/linux-user/syscall_defs.h
> +++ b/linux-user/syscall_defs.h
> @@ -519,7 +519,7 @@ struct target_sigaction {
> abi_ulong _sa_handler;
> abi_ulong sa_flags;
> target_sigset_t sa_mask;
> - abi_ulong sa_restorer;
> + abi_ulong ka_restorer;
> };
Maybe this is something we could expand a little on in the difference
between the two here (or maybe in the later commit?).
> #elif defined(TARGET_MIPS)
> struct target_sigaction {
> diff --git a/linux-user/alpha/signal.c b/linux-user/alpha/signal.c
> index 86f5d2276d..3aa4b339a4 100644
> --- a/linux-user/alpha/signal.c
> +++ b/linux-user/alpha/signal.c
> @@ -138,8 +138,8 @@ void setup_frame(int sig, struct target_sigaction *ka,
>
> setup_sigcontext(&frame->sc, env, frame_addr, set);
>
> - if (ka->sa_restorer) {
> - r26 = ka->sa_restorer;
> + if (ka->ka_restorer) {
> + r26 = ka->ka_restorer;
> } else {
> __put_user(INSN_MOV_R30_R16, &frame->retcode[0]);
> __put_user(INSN_LDI_R0 + TARGET_NR_sigreturn,
> @@ -192,8 +192,8 @@ void setup_rt_frame(int sig, struct target_sigaction *ka,
> __put_user(set->sig[i], &frame->uc.tuc_sigmask.sig[i]);
> }
>
> - if (ka->sa_restorer) {
> - r26 = ka->sa_restorer;
> + if (ka->ka_restorer) {
> + r26 = ka->ka_restorer;
> } else {
> __put_user(INSN_MOV_R30_R16, &frame->retcode[0]);
> __put_user(INSN_LDI_R0 + TARGET_NR_rt_sigreturn,
> diff --git a/linux-user/syscall.c b/linux-user/syscall.c
> index 95d79ddc43..ee21eb5e6f 100644
> --- a/linux-user/syscall.c
> +++ b/linux-user/syscall.c
> @@ -8989,7 +8989,7 @@ static abi_long do_syscall1(void *cpu_env, int num,
> abi_long arg1,
> act._sa_handler = old_act->_sa_handler;
> target_siginitset(&act.sa_mask, old_act->sa_mask);
> act.sa_flags = old_act->sa_flags;
> - act.sa_restorer = 0;
> + act.ka_restorer = 0;
> unlock_user_struct(old_act, arg2, 0);
> pact = &act;
> }
> @@ -9085,7 +9085,7 @@ static abi_long do_syscall1(void *cpu_env, int num,
> abi_long arg1,
> act._sa_handler = rt_act->_sa_handler;
> act.sa_mask = rt_act->sa_mask;
> act.sa_flags = rt_act->sa_flags;
> - act.sa_restorer = arg5;
> + act.ka_restorer = arg5;
> unlock_user_struct(rt_act, arg2, 0);
> pact = &act;
> }
Otherwise looks fine to me:
Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
--
Alex Bennée
- [PATCH v2 0/7] linux-user: sigaction fixes/cleanups, Richard Henderson, 2021/04/22
- [PATCH v2 1/7] linux-user/alpha: Fix rt sigframe return, Richard Henderson, 2021/04/22
- [PATCH v2 2/7] linux-user/alpha: Rename the sigaction restorer field, Richard Henderson, 2021/04/22
- Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] linux-user/alpha: Rename the sigaction restorer field,
Alex Bennée <=
- [PATCH v2 4/7] linux-user: Honor TARGET_ARCH_HAS_SA_RESTORER in do_syscall, Richard Henderson, 2021/04/22
- [PATCH v2 7/7] linux-user: Tidy TARGET_NR_rt_sigaction, Richard Henderson, 2021/04/22
- [PATCH v2 6/7] linux-user/alpha: Share code for TARGET_NR_sigaction, Richard Henderson, 2021/04/22