Hello!
On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 5:32 AM Sergey Bugaev via Libc-alpha <
libc-al...@sourceware.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 1:45 AM Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@gnu.org>
> wrote:
> > Sergey Bugaev, le dim. 19 mars 2023 18:09:46 +0300, a ecrit:
> > > On EXC_BAD_ACCESS, exception subcode is used to pass the faulting
> memory
> > > address, so it needs to be (at least) pointer-sized. Thus, make it into
> > > a long.
> > >
> > > This requires matching changes in glibc and the Hurd.
> >
> > But the change doesn't affect 32bit glibc and hurd since
> > rpc_long_integer_t is really like integer_t there, right?
>
> It's supposed to be ABI-compatible on 32-bit, since all these types
> are 32-bit integers there, yes. (But maybe I messed up, do check!)
>
> But it may break source-level compatibility (if you only apply the
> Mach change but not glibc, or vice versa); as in maybe GCC will
> complain about int vs long in function prototype vs definition. I
> haven't actually checked, since I have both changes applied locally.
>
It breaks compatibility for Hurd code:
hurd/mach-defpager/default_pager.c:3789:1: error: conflicting types for
'catch_exception_raise'; have 'kern_return_t(mach_port_t, mach_port_t,
mach_port_t, int, int, int)' {aka 'int(unsigned int, unsigned int, unsigned
int, int, int, int)'}
3789 | catch_exception_raise(mach_port_t exception_port,
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from
/home/runner/_work/cross-hurd/cross-hurd/src/hurd/mach-defpager/default_pager.c:67:
./exc_S.h:19:15: note: previous declaration of 'catch_exception_raise' with
type 'kern_return_t(mach_port_t, mach_port_t, mach_port_t, integer_t,
integer_t, rpc_long_integer_t)' {aka 'int(unsigned int, unsigned int,
unsigned int, int, int, long int)'}
19 | kern_return_t catch_exception_raise
> Sergey
>
