| Message ID | 20210618192951.125651-4-richard.henderson@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | linux-user: Move signal trampolines to new page | expand |
On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 at 20:32, Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> wrote: > > Split out a helper function to test for a v2 signal frame. > > Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org > Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> > --- > linux-user/arm/signal.c | 13 +++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/linux-user/arm/signal.c b/linux-user/arm/signal.c > index 32b68ee302..cb65623965 100644 > --- a/linux-user/arm/signal.c > +++ b/linux-user/arm/signal.c > @@ -165,6 +165,11 @@ static inline int valid_user_regs(CPUARMState *regs) > return 1; > } > > +static bool v2_frame(void) > +{ > + return get_osversion() >= 0x020612; > +} Not sure how much we care about supporting claiming to be a 15-year-old kernel any more (especially since we set UNAME_MINIMUM_RELEASE to 2.6.32...) so it's awfully tempting to just blow away the v1 frame support instead... Anyway Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> thanks -- PMM
On 6/29/21 6:53 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 at 20:32, Richard Henderson > <richard.henderson@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> Split out a helper function to test for a v2 signal frame. >> >> Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org >> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> >> --- >> linux-user/arm/signal.c | 13 +++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/linux-user/arm/signal.c b/linux-user/arm/signal.c >> index 32b68ee302..cb65623965 100644 >> --- a/linux-user/arm/signal.c >> +++ b/linux-user/arm/signal.c >> @@ -165,6 +165,11 @@ static inline int valid_user_regs(CPUARMState *regs) >> return 1; >> } >> >> +static bool v2_frame(void) >> +{ >> + return get_osversion() >= 0x020612; >> +} > > Not sure how much we care about supporting claiming to be a 15-year-old > kernel any more (especially since we set UNAME_MINIMUM_RELEASE to 2.6.32...) > so it's awfully tempting to just blow away the v1 frame support instead... > > Anyway > Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> I hadn't noticed the minimum release setting. Yes, I think it would be better to remove the v1 support instead of bodging around it like this. r~
diff --git a/linux-user/arm/signal.c b/linux-user/arm/signal.c index 32b68ee302..cb65623965 100644 --- a/linux-user/arm/signal.c +++ b/linux-user/arm/signal.c @@ -165,6 +165,11 @@ static inline int valid_user_regs(CPUARMState *regs) return 1; } +static bool v2_frame(void) +{ + return get_osversion() >= 0x020612; +} + static void setup_sigcontext(struct target_sigcontext *sc, /*struct _fpstate *fpstate,*/ CPUARMState *env, abi_ulong mask) @@ -422,7 +427,7 @@ sigsegv: void setup_frame(int usig, struct target_sigaction *ka, target_sigset_t *set, CPUARMState *regs) { - if (get_osversion() >= 0x020612) { + if (v2_frame()) { setup_frame_v2(usig, ka, set, regs); } else { setup_frame_v1(usig, ka, set, regs); @@ -516,7 +521,7 @@ void setup_rt_frame(int usig, struct target_sigaction *ka, target_siginfo_t *info, target_sigset_t *set, CPUARMState *env) { - if (get_osversion() >= 0x020612) { + if (v2_frame()) { setup_rt_frame_v2(usig, ka, info, set, env); } else { setup_rt_frame_v1(usig, ka, info, set, env); @@ -734,7 +739,7 @@ badframe: long do_sigreturn(CPUARMState *env) { - if (get_osversion() >= 0x020612) { + if (v2_frame()) { return do_sigreturn_v2(env); } else { return do_sigreturn_v1(env); @@ -823,7 +828,7 @@ badframe: long do_rt_sigreturn(CPUARMState *env) { - if (get_osversion() >= 0x020612) { + if (v2_frame()) { return do_rt_sigreturn_v2(env); } else { return do_rt_sigreturn_v1(env);
Split out a helper function to test for a v2 signal frame. Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> --- linux-user/arm/signal.c | 13 +++++++++---- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)