On Tue, 29 Jan 2019, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > I recalled that aarch64 defines RSEQ_SIG to a different value which maps to > a valid trap instruction. So I plan to move the RSEQ_SIG define to per-arch > headers like this: > > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/aarch64/bits/rseq.h | 24 ++ > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/bits/rseq.h | 24 ++ > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/bits/rseq.h | 23 ++ > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/mips/bits/rseq.h | 24 ++ > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/bits/rseq.h | 24 ++ > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/s390/bits/rseq.h | 24 ++ > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86/bits/rseq.h | 24 ++ > > where "bits/rseq.h" contains a #error: > > # error "Architecture does not define RSEQ_SIG. > > sys/rseq.h will now include <bits/rseq.h>. We're trying to reduce the number of cases where most or all new glibc architecture ports need to provide a bits/ header, by making the generic headers handle the common case. So a generic header with a #error, and lots of architecture-specific headers mostly with the same value for RSEQ_SIG, seems unfortunate. I'd hope the generic header could use a generic value, with architecture-specific variants only for architectures with some reason for a different value. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
