| Message ID | 1459260105-5536-1-git-send-email-chengang@emindsoft.com.cn (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Le 29/03/2016 16:01, chengang@emindsoft.com.cn a écrit : > From: Chen Gang <chengang@emindsoft.com.cn> > > The restorer needs the return code address which is frame->retcode, not > frame itself. > > Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com> > --- > linux-user/signal.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/linux-user/signal.c b/linux-user/signal.c > index e487f9e..4157154 100644 > --- a/linux-user/signal.c > +++ b/linux-user/signal.c > @@ -5455,7 +5455,7 @@ static void setup_rt_frame(int sig, struct target_sigaction *ka, > &frame->retcode[1]); > __put_user(INSN_CALLSYS, &frame->retcode[2]); > /* imb(); */ > - r26 = frame_addr; > + r26 = frame_addr + offsetof(struct target_rt_sigframe, retcode); > } > > if (err) { > If you change setup_rt_frame(), you must update setup_frame() too. It seems correct. Richard, as you have written the original code, could you check this is correct? Laurent
On 3/29/16 22:25, Laurent Vivier wrote: > Le 29/03/2016 16:01, chengang@emindsoft.com.cn a écrit : >> The restorer needs the return code address which is frame->retcode, not >> frame itself. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com> >> --- >> linux-user/signal.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/linux-user/signal.c b/linux-user/signal.c >> index e487f9e..4157154 100644 >> --- a/linux-user/signal.c >> +++ b/linux-user/signal.c >> @@ -5455,7 +5455,7 @@ static void setup_rt_frame(int sig, struct target_sigaction *ka, >> &frame->retcode[1]); >> __put_user(INSN_CALLSYS, &frame->retcode[2]); >> /* imb(); */ >> - r26 = frame_addr; >> + r26 = frame_addr + offsetof(struct target_rt_sigframe, retcode); >> } >> >> if (err) { >> > > If you change setup_rt_frame(), you must update setup_frame() too. > Oh, yes, thanks. > It seems correct. > > Richard, as you have written the original code, could you check this is > correct? > Please give a check when you have time. Thanks.
On 03/29/2016 07:25 AM, Laurent Vivier wrote: > > > Le 29/03/2016 16:01, chengang@emindsoft.com.cn a écrit : >> From: Chen Gang <chengang@emindsoft.com.cn> >> >> The restorer needs the return code address which is frame->retcode, not >> frame itself. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com> >> --- >> linux-user/signal.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/linux-user/signal.c b/linux-user/signal.c >> index e487f9e..4157154 100644 >> --- a/linux-user/signal.c >> +++ b/linux-user/signal.c >> @@ -5455,7 +5455,7 @@ static void setup_rt_frame(int sig, struct target_sigaction *ka, >> &frame->retcode[1]); >> __put_user(INSN_CALLSYS, &frame->retcode[2]); >> /* imb(); */ >> - r26 = frame_addr; >> + r26 = frame_addr + offsetof(struct target_rt_sigframe, retcode); >> } >> >> if (err) { >> > > If you change setup_rt_frame(), you must update setup_frame() too. > > It seems correct. > > Richard, as you have written the original code, could you check this is > correct? Yes, it's correct, and yes both functions need fixing. In practice, this path is historical and will never be used; it was now a very old glibc that didn't supply a restorer. r~
diff --git a/linux-user/signal.c b/linux-user/signal.c index e487f9e..4157154 100644 --- a/linux-user/signal.c +++ b/linux-user/signal.c @@ -5455,7 +5455,7 @@ static void setup_rt_frame(int sig, struct target_sigaction *ka, &frame->retcode[1]); __put_user(INSN_CALLSYS, &frame->retcode[2]); /* imb(); */ - r26 = frame_addr; + r26 = frame_addr + offsetof(struct target_rt_sigframe, retcode); } if (err) {