[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Question about signal syscalls !

To: "Ralf Baechle" <>
Subject: Re: Question about signal syscalls !
From: "Franck Bui-Huu" <>
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 09:54:05 +0100
Cc: linux-mips <>
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=flzg7reEl1jrC2oWaZxSEiko8xJef0Fb1IBKYIsR1nnBUfRP0aGnxeY3H/VLjr/7MJFr6w7iEQPYtA74J/I5iRaVt8lN2qi+Ug3lQcve1pUQn+NtdT2Exmp0C4hxRpgzs/IUU9Gwes4cgfliRymKZK9qHJu4mSeAK6/VTI1pD+0=
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <> <>
On 2/1/07, Ralf Baechle <> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 03:54:40PM +0100, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:

> Let's take for example sys_sigreturn(). In my understanding this
> syscall is used automatically when the signal handler returns. At this
> time, I don't see the point to save the static registers since they
> have been already saved by setup_sigcontext().
> Actually I don't see why they need to be saved/restored at all...

There is no need.  Seems you found a harmless but longstanding but
introduced by c40738a70f3e02e8554b78af334dc95356a78989.

OK. Just to be sure about what you meant, there are currently 2 places
where we save s0-s7 regs. One in setup_sigcontext() and one done by
save_static_function(). Do you mean that both savings are useless ?
It's actually what I'm thinking and if so
setup_sigcontext()/restore_sigcontext() have a harmless bug too.


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