On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 10:05:16AM -0600, Justin Hibbits wrote:
>> Good catch! I'll commit the change tonight.
> I looked once at the powerpc sigsend(), and I think that it has an
> issue. The usfp is calculated by taking the stack poi
On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 10:05:16AM -0600, Justin Hibbits wrote:
> Good catch! I'll commit the change tonight.
I looked once at the powerpc sigsend(), and I think that it has an
issue. The usfp is calculated by taking the stack pointer at the time
of signal delivery and substracting the sigframe si
Good catch! I'll commit the change tonight.
- Justin
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 3:48 AM, Mark Millard wrote:
> I tried the change to -32 and 32 (from -20 and 20) on/for the powerpc
> (32-bit) PowerMac that I use and the results were:
>
> A) "info frame" in gdb shows signal handlers are now started
I tried the change to -32 and 32 (from -20 and 20) on/for the powerpc (32-bit)
PowerMac that I use and the results were:
A) "info frame" in gdb shows signal handlers are now started with 16-byte
aligned stack frames. (Applies to gcc 4.2.1 based contexts too, not just to the
clang 3.8.0 ones wit
The -16/16 code below produced correct alignment but too little space.
The -20/20 code below produces enough space but misalignment.
To maintain 16-byte alignment while increasing the space would have required
going from -16/16 to -32/32. At least that is how I understand this code.
Index: sys
