Michael Neuling <[email protected]> writes:
>> @@ -263,7 +263,9 @@ long compat_arch_ptrace(struct task_stru
>> ret = ptrace_put_reg(child, numReg, freg);
>> } else {
>> flush_fp_to_thread(child);
>> - ((unsigned int *)child->thread.regs)[index] = data;
>> + ((unsigned int *)child->thread.fpr)
>> + [TS_FPRWIDTH * (numReg - PT_FPR0) * 2 +
>> + index % 2] = data;
>
> I think the indexing here should be the same as PEEKUSR_3264. This
> looks better but all this magic indexing makes me want to vomit.
How about this instead:
@@ -241,6 +241,7 @@ long compat_arch_ptrace(struct task_stru
case PPC_PTRACE_POKEUSR_3264: {
u32 index;
u32 numReg;
+ u32 *tmp;
ret = -EIO;
/* Determine which register the user wants */
@@ -263,7 +264,8 @@ long compat_arch_ptrace(struct task_stru
ret = ptrace_put_reg(child, numReg, freg);
} else {
flush_fp_to_thread(child);
- ((unsigned int *)child->thread.regs)[index] = data;
+ tmp = (u32 *)child->thread.fpr[numReg - PT_FPR0];
+ tmp[index % 2] = data;
ret = 0;
}
break;
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, [email protected]
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
