linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: siginfo difference MIPS and other arches

To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: siginfo difference MIPS and other arches
From: Manuel Lauss <manuel.lauss@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 17:55:01 +0200
Cc: Linux-MIPS <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=tQyFO5tPAK7BGqmJUjGw9zzu4pmjW9Nezhk1Ib1Z1pU=; b=xms+spi+fCeQlgcCTWTLJKdiRlm7+OSBNdwqGmYgZg6lYhVImq/cTP0eUTN19wOg5u XFlYdTG0Y+UEXMhOGA60X/Sbdqf9TXWpxLwnWvOovui+XJ1Ic8MpGRq1lmPh31B3jEPn iHs3CbEsUn3pnyFfYkULZaxzwQE9CiZ6t1lHY=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=I7kuJXUjnh5rthuJcw+ecoYCrI4c2EZqi3+rXLM3nT6ajGIdXv7lfV3Sn4FLjUqmwn dS4W894EiEdrqxGpLyo5+fyk4e4fHmHsNOVhZWLwQdYle/zj8jBbm6CQearwfzNV95j/ WBI0JOJUQRS0AkT5Siajd23pShXqr3niW7cso=
In-reply-to: <20101008155319.GC12107@linux-mips.org>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <AANLkTikXySeekzpYeGf6wuH5NTMxLCK_oirvBcDu4h63@mail.gmail.com> <20101008155319.GC12107@linux-mips.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 04:16:33PM +0200, Manuel Lauss wrote:
>
>> current -git build breaks because of upstream commit
>> a337fdac7a5622d1e6547f4b476c14dfe5a2c892, which introduced
>> an unconditional check for siginfo_._sifields._sifault._si_addr_lsb field.
>>
>> Is there a reason why MIPS doesn't use the default siginfo_t structure
>> as other architectures do?
>
> History - the MIPS structure is identical to IRIX.

Does anyone still run IRIX binaries on current linux?
(and Isn't IRIX dead anyway? :)  )

Manuel

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