[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Question about signal syscalls !

To: Daniel Jacobowitz <>
Subject: Re: Question about signal syscalls !
From: Ralf Baechle <>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 01:10:48 +0000
Cc: David Daney <>, Franck Bui-Huu <>, linux-mips <>
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
User-agent: Mutt/
On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 07:55:16PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 12:41:07PM -0800, David Daney wrote:
> > I thought you were suggesting not saving s0-s7.  If you don't save them, 
> > you cannot restore them.  And they have to be restored from the 
> > sigcontext in the user's address space.   This allows user space signal 
> > handlers to emulate trapping instructions, and the like.
> Not necessarily, because you can trust the signal handler to restore
> them, and it can save them itself if it needs to.  As I said, I think
> there's at least one architecture which does it this way.  I'm afraid I
> don't know which one.

Not saving the s-registers into the signal frame would be a neat
optimization.  It wouldn't only make things a little faster it would
also free space in the signal frame which is needed for CPU
architecture extensions that have more state to save.  I had to burn
almost the entire available space for the DSP extensions, so I wonder
if we could get GDB to work?  The alternative is probably a new version
of the sigrestore.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>