linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Have sigpoll and sigio band field match glibc for n64

To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Have sigpoll and sigio band field match glibc for n64
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:19:51 -0400
Cc: Peter Watkins <pwatkins@sicortex.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20070310132423.GA1295@linux-mips.org>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1173469586997-git-send-email-pwatkins@sicortex.com> <20070310132423.GA1295@linux-mips.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 01:24:24PM +0000, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 02:46:25PM -0500, Peter Watkins wrote:
> 
> > The siginfo field si_fd is incorrect on n64 because the band field does
> > not match glibc.
> 
> Susv3 says:
> 
> [...]
> The <signal.h> header shall define the siginfo_t type as a structure that
> includes at least the following members:
> 
> [...]
> long          si_band   Band event for SIGPOLL. 
> [...]
> 
> So the kernel is right, glibc is wrong I'd say ...

This will break the ABI only for uses of si_band and si_fd, and only
on n64.  Anyone see a reason why I shouldn't change glibc?

Ralf, as I mentioned on IRC, I've got bigger worries about siginfo.
Shouldn't n32 be using the same siginfo as o32?  It's got pointers in it.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

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