"Kevin D. Kissell" <email@example.com> writes:
> > Hi,
> > just to get it right - As i thought the FPU emulator is not really
> > optional - It is even required for fpu-enabled devices which means
> > we should clean the code in that way that if the user decides to
> > compile in the fpu emulator into the kernel we do an autodetection
> > upfront and change some of the entry/exit/lazy_fpu stuff.
> > If the user decides not to compile in the FPU Emulator he is on his
> > own and we ignore the whole FPU stuff and simply send SIGILL/SIGFPE
> > to the processes causing all fpu binarys to fail on non-fpu enabled
> > kernels.
> Not quite. Unless we create a variant of glibc that neither
> initializes the FP control register on program startup, nor
glibc doesn't initialize it for shared programs.
> saves/restores the FP registers in setjmp/longjmp, the
Any ideas how this can be done?
> model of "simply sending SIGILL/SIGFPE" will result
> in *all* processes being terminated with extreme prejudice,
> starting with init!
SuSE Labs firstname.lastname@example.org