On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:22 PM Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jan 2022 at 16:48, Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> wrote:
> >
> > Returns 1 for signals that cause core files.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stacey Son <s...@freebsd.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Kyle Evans <kev...@freebsd.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com>
> > ---
> > bsd-user/signal.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/bsd-user/signal.c b/bsd-user/signal.c
> > index a6e07277fb2..824535be8b8 100644
> > --- a/bsd-user/signal.c
> > +++ b/bsd-user/signal.c
> > @@ -92,6 +92,23 @@ static inline void
> host_to_target_siginfo_noswap(target_siginfo_t *tinfo,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > +/* Returns 1 if given signal should dump core if not handled. */
> > +static int core_dump_signal(int sig)
> > +{
> > + switch (sig) {
> > + case TARGET_SIGABRT:
> > + case TARGET_SIGFPE:
> > + case TARGET_SIGILL:
> > + case TARGET_SIGQUIT:
> > + case TARGET_SIGSEGV:
> > + case TARGET_SIGTRAP:
> > + case TARGET_SIGBUS:
> > + return 1;
> > + default:
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > +}
>
> Code is fine, but since this is a static function with no callers
> the compiler is going to emit a warning about that. It's a small
> function, so the easiest thing is just to squash this into the
> following patch which is what adds the code that calls it.
>
Sure thing. I'm still trying to get a feel for right-sizing the chunking...
Since the warning didn't fail the compile, I thought it would be OK,
but can easily fold this in with the first patch to use it.
Warner
