[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [PATCH, RFC] MIPS: Implement the getcontext API

To: "David Daney" <>, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
Subject: RE: [PATCH, RFC] MIPS: Implement the getcontext API
From: "David VomLehn (dvomlehn)" <>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 13:23:31 -0500
Authentication-results: sj-dkim-2;; dkim=pass ( sig from verified; );
Cc: "Ralf Baechle" <>, <>, <>, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>, "Richard Sandiford" <>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1321; t=1236277415; x=1237141415; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;;; z=From:=20=22David=20VomLehn=20(dvomlehn)=22=20<dvomlehn@cis> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[PATCH,=20RFC]=20MIPS=3A=20Implement=20 the=20getcontext=20API |Sender:=20; bh=l5AIuFnITfSmQxyIpC/Jpt1DHipPwNOu4ok08B1NLcY=; b=oY/rLoVg/rTy8kE0LSKiKW98eC5OtzvgSLnvVsYq8qMjLeggESqUQbGkU4 3mHj9rY9KZaXIJW5GgC2YU5Q7aB+YsZGr5hDWz4KCTpdi10JzhIZH6OBqrRP yIu6ch12tb;
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <> <>
Thread-index: Acmds9qK4urogWtGSdKC7Amxa4hzaQACwSEw
Thread-topic: [PATCH, RFC] MIPS: Implement the getcontext API
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> [] On Behalf Of David Daney
> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 8:58 AM
> To: Maciej W. Rozycki
> Cc: Ralf Baechle;; 
>; Maciej W. Rozycki; Richard Sandiford
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] MIPS: Implement the getcontext API
> Adding Richard S. as he may be interested...
> Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, David Daney wrote:
> > 
> >> Note the libgcc currently makes the assumption that the 
> layout of the stack
> >> for signal handlers is fixed.  The DWARF2 unwinder needs 
> this information to
> >> be able to unwind through signal frames (see 
> gcc/config/mips/linux-unwind.h),
> >> so it is already a de facto part of the ABI.
> > 
> >  I do hope it was agreed upon at some point.
> As with many things, there was no formal agreement.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no formal ABI for MIPS Linux,
period. The closest we have is the MIPS psABI, which documented the o32
ABI as it stood ten years ago. What we have now does not conform to that
document in some subtle, but non-trivial, ways. If I'm wrong, I'd love
to know where I could find documentation.

David VomLehn

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