On 06/06/18 18:45, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:
>>
>> The use of signals without SA_RESTORER is considered obsolete, but it's
>> somewhat surprising that the vdso isn't there; it should be mapped even for
>> static binaries esp. on i386 since it is the preferred way to do system
>> calls (you
On 06/06/18 18:45, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:
>>
>> The use of signals without SA_RESTORER is considered obsolete, but it's
>> somewhat surprising that the vdso isn't there; it should be mapped even for
>> static binaries esp. on i386 since it is the preferred way to do system
>> calls (you
On 2018/6/7 10:39, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 6, 2018, at 7:05 PM, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 2018/6/7 1:01, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:18 AM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
>>> wrote:
I found that glibc has already dealt with this
On 2018/6/7 10:39, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 6, 2018, at 7:05 PM, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 2018/6/7 1:01, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:18 AM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
>>> wrote:
I found that glibc has already dealt with this
> On Jun 6, 2018, at 7:05 PM, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 2018/6/7 1:01, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:18 AM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must
>>> have been met before,
> On Jun 6, 2018, at 7:05 PM, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 2018/6/7 1:01, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:18 AM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must
>>> have been met before,
On 2018/6/7 1:01, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:18 AM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
> wrote:
>>
>> I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must have
>> been met before, should it be maintained by libc/user?
>>
>> if (GLRO(dl_sysinfo_dso) == NULL)
On 2018/6/7 1:01, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:18 AM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
> wrote:
>>
>> I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must have
>> been met before, should it be maintained by libc/user?
>>
>> if (GLRO(dl_sysinfo_dso) == NULL)
On 2018/6/7 1:48, h...@zytor.com wrote:
> On June 6, 2018 2:17:42 AM PDT, "Leizhen (ThunderTown)"
> wrote:
>> I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must
>> have been met before, should it be maintained by libc/user?
>>
>> if (GLRO(dl_sysinfo_dso) == NULL)
>>
On 2018/6/7 1:48, h...@zytor.com wrote:
> On June 6, 2018 2:17:42 AM PDT, "Leizhen (ThunderTown)"
> wrote:
>> I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must
>> have been met before, should it be maintained by libc/user?
>>
>> if (GLRO(dl_sysinfo_dso) == NULL)
>>
On June 6, 2018 2:17:42 AM PDT, "Leizhen (ThunderTown)"
wrote:
>I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must
>have been met before, should it be maintained by libc/user?
>
> if (GLRO(dl_sysinfo_dso) == NULL)
> {
> kact.sa_flags |= SA_RESTORER;
On June 6, 2018 2:17:42 AM PDT, "Leizhen (ThunderTown)"
wrote:
>I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must
>have been met before, should it be maintained by libc/user?
>
> if (GLRO(dl_sysinfo_dso) == NULL)
> {
> kact.sa_flags |= SA_RESTORER;
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:18 AM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
wrote:
>
> I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must have
> been met before, should it be maintained by libc/user?
>
> if (GLRO(dl_sysinfo_dso) == NULL)
> {
> kact.sa_flags |=
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:18 AM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
wrote:
>
> I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must have
> been met before, should it be maintained by libc/user?
>
> if (GLRO(dl_sysinfo_dso) == NULL)
> {
> kact.sa_flags |=
I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must have
been met before, should it be maintained by libc/user?
if (GLRO(dl_sysinfo_dso) == NULL)
{
kact.sa_flags |= SA_RESTORER;
kact.sa_restorer = ((act->sa_flags & SA_SIGINFO)
I found that glibc has already dealt with this case. So this issue must have
been met before, should it be maintained by libc/user?
if (GLRO(dl_sysinfo_dso) == NULL)
{
kact.sa_flags |= SA_RESTORER;
kact.sa_restorer = ((act->sa_flags & SA_SIGINFO)
On 2018/6/5 19:24, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:
> After I executed "echo 0 > /proc/sys/abi/vsyscall32" to disable vdso, the
> rt_sigaction01 test case from ltp_2015 failed.
> The test case source code please refer to the attachment, and the output as
> blow:
>
> -
>
On 2018/6/5 19:24, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:
> After I executed "echo 0 > /proc/sys/abi/vsyscall32" to disable vdso, the
> rt_sigaction01 test case from ltp_2015 failed.
> The test case source code please refer to the attachment, and the output as
> blow:
>
> -
>
After I executed "echo 0 > /proc/sys/abi/vsyscall32" to disable vdso, the
rt_sigaction01 test case from ltp_2015 failed.
The test case source code please refer to the attachment, and the output as
blow:
-
./rt_sigaction01
rt_sigaction010 TINFO : signal: 34
rt_sigaction01
After I executed "echo 0 > /proc/sys/abi/vsyscall32" to disable vdso, the
rt_sigaction01 test case from ltp_2015 failed.
The test case source code please refer to the attachment, and the output as
blow:
-
./rt_sigaction01
rt_sigaction010 TINFO : signal: 34
rt_sigaction01
20 matches
Mail list logo
