Hi Zhangjin,
May 28, 2023 12:40:31 Zhangjin Wu <falcon@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi, Willy
>
>> Hi Zhangjin,
>>
>> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 01:33:14AM +0800, Zhangjin Wu wrote:
>>> Hi, Willy
>>>
>>> Thanks very mush for your kindly review, discuss and suggestion, now we
>>> get full rv32 support ;-)
>>>
>>> In the first series [1], we have fixed up the compile errors about
>>> _start and __NR_llseek for rv32, but left compile errors about tons of
>>> time32 syscalls (removed after kernel commit d4c08b9776b3 ("riscv: Use
>>> latest system call ABI")) and the missing fstat in nolibc-test.c [2],
>>> now we have fixed up all of them.
>>
>> (...)
>>
>> I have read the comments that others made on the series and overall
>> agree. I've seen that you intend to prepare a v2. I think we must
>> first decide how to better deal with emulated syscalls as I said in
>> an earlier message. Probably that we should just add a specific test
>> case for EFAULT in nolibc-test since it's the only one (I think) that
>> risks to trigger crashes with emulated syscalls. We could also imagine
>> dealing with the signal ourselves but I'm not that keen on going to
>> implement signal() & longjmp() for now :-/
>>
>
> Yes, user-space signal() may be the right direction, we just need to let
> user-space not crash the kernel, what about this 'solution' for current stage
> (consider the pure time64 support too):
If you did manage to crash the actual kernel than that would be a bug in the kernel that needs to be fixed.
Feel free to describe how it happened and I'll take a look.
Thomas
