On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 08:26:11AM +0100, Sören Tempel wrote:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > Have you tested this in 32-bit mode? It does not look correct based
> > on the glibc definitions. Looking at glibc it seems that it ought to
> > be
>
> As stated in the commit message, I have only tested
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Have you tested this in 32-bit mode? It does not look correct based
> on the glibc definitions. Looking at glibc it seems that it ought to
> be
As stated in the commit message, I have only tested this on Alpine Linux
ppc64le (which uses musl libc). Unfortunately, I don
On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 02:59:02PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 6, 2022 at 11:11 PM wrote:
> >
> > +#ifdef __PPC64__
> > + ret.sigpc = ((ucontext_t*)(context))->uc_mcontext.gp_regs[32];
> > +#else
> > + ret.sigpc = ((ucontext_t*)(context))->uc_mcontext.gregs[32];
> > +#
On Sun, Mar 6, 2022 at 11:11 PM wrote:
>
> +#ifdef __PPC64__
> + ret.sigpc = ((ucontext_t*)(context))->uc_mcontext.gp_regs[32];
> +#else
> + ret.sigpc = ((ucontext_t*)(context))->uc_mcontext.gregs[32];
> +#endif
Have you tested this in 32-bit mode? It does not look correct based
on t
From: Sören Tempel
The .regs member is primarily intended to be used in conjunction with
ptrace. Since this code is not using ptrace, using .regs is a bad idea.
Furthermore, the code currently fails to compile on musl since the
pt_regs type (used by .regs) is in an incomplete type which has to be
