On 09.02.2012, at 19:36, Alex Barcelo wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 00:00, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 4 February 2012 14:26, Alex Barcelo wrote:
>>> (...)
>> This looks like a bug, yes -- the other architectures have the !
>> (or equivalent code) in their get_sigframe() implementations so
>>
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 00:00, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 4 February 2012 14:26, Alex Barcelo wrote:
>> (...)
> This looks like a bug, yes -- the other architectures have the !
> (or equivalent code) in their get_sigframe() implementations so
> probably ppc is just wrong here.
Yes, indeed. They do
On 4 February 2012 14:26, Alex Barcelo wrote:
> I am barely able to understand this inline function:
>
> static inline int sas_ss_flags(unsigned long sp)
> {
> return (target_sigaltstack_used.ss_size == 0 ? SS_DISABLE
> : on_sig_stack(sp) ? SS_ONSTACK : 0);
> }
> (signal.c @97)
>
> .
I am barely able to understand this inline function:
static inline int sas_ss_flags(unsigned long sp)
{
return (target_sigaltstack_used.ss_size == 0 ? SS_DISABLE
: on_sig_stack(sp) ? SS_ONSTACK : 0);
}
(signal.c @97)
... and it seems wrong to me when used in the following function
