On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Jun Sun wrote:
> That was the conclusion, but did not make to the CVS tree, probably due to
> Ralf's unwillingness to take a overhead for "flawed" CPUs.
What overhead? The code is conditional at the preprocessor level.
> In my last patch for Vr41xx, I have a patch for this. Basically, I will send
> a SIGSYS if the return value is a small negative. This will practically
> satify all the need while keep the change minimum. The small modification to
> the semantic is not too bad at all if you consider the original syscall
> semantic is already badly broken.
The default action for SIGSYS is to abort with a core dump, so it seems
fine here -- I don't object. It allows us to use the normal return path,
instead of that crude jump hack, too.
Not that I particularly care about sysmips(MIPS_ATOMIC_SET) anymore...
Maciej
--
+ Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland +
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
+ e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available +
|