On Friday, October 28, 2016 08:54:50 PM Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 09:59:26AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > Well, we could perhaps patch those to use SA_SIGINFO instead, but if it's > > a non-trivial amount of effort I'm not going to bother. I'm surprised that > > some of those would use sigcontext. Both mono and go post-date SA_SIGINFO > > being standardized and supported on FreeBSD AFAIK. Supporting sigcontext > > just means extra BSD-specific code in those applications compared to using > > SA_SIGINFO. :-/ > > For libunwind, I can see a rationale for struct sigcontext use. It seems > that on Linux, rt_sigreturn(2) syscall takes struct sigcontext *, and not > struct ucontext *, as the argument. This is not unreasonable, because > the additional ucontext fields make no sense for sigreturn, for us they > are copied into kernel AS but are also unused. > > So my FreeBSD port followed the existing Linux code. And I started wondering > should we change our sigreturn(2) to take sigcontext * instead of ucontext *.
Hmm, that's an interesting thought (and it seems 'struct sigcontext' isn't BSD-only). We would definitely want to ensure that the initial bit of ucontext_t matches a sigcontext if we were to go that route. -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
