On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 09:44:05AM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see how this would break musl;
> we just inspect the PC in the mcontext, which I don't see any changes
> to and which should still point to the next instruction of the
> interrupted context. I
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 12:27:14PM +0100, AL glibc-alpha wrote:
> * Nicholas Piggin:
>
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso64/sigtramp.S
> > b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso64/sigtramp.S
> > index a8cc0409d7d2..bbf68cd01088 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso64/sigtramp.S
> > +++
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 01:31:27PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 03:19:22PM -0300, Raoni Fassina Firmino wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 09:44:05AM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> > > Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see how this would break musl;
>
Balance return predictor stack in signal trampoline")
[2] https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2021-January/223194.html
Fixes: 0138ba5783ae ("powerpc/64/signal: Balance return predictor stack in
signal trampoline")
Signed-off-by: Raoni Fassina Firmino
---
arch/powerpc/k
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 05:41:35PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> Are you planning to update glibc to cope with this as well? Any idea
> about musl? If so, including version numbers would be good (not that
> it's really a problem to carry this patch around).
For glibc from the beginning I
