[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171105123053.GZ15263@port70.net>
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2017 13:30:53 +0100
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: SIGSEGV_FAULT_STACKPOINTER on powerpc
* Tobias Koch <tobias.koch@...terra.com> [2017-11-05 11:28:08 +0000]:
>
> libsigsegv defines SIGSEGV_FAULT_STACKPOINTER in fault-linux-powerpc.h as
>
> # define SIGSEGV_FAULT_STACKPOINTER ((ucontext_t *) ucp)->uc_mcontext.regs->gpr[1]
>
> which doesn't match up with what's defined in musl's arch/powerpc/bits/signal.h. I took a guess and changed it to
>
> # define SIGSEGV_FAULT_STACKPOINTER ((ucontext_t *) ucp)->uc_mcontext.gregs[1]
>
> to make it compile, but I don't know if that is correct. I'd appreciate any help.
>
in glibc uc_mcontext member of ucontext_t is an union of
pt_regs* (linux ptrace.h defines it) and mcontext_t* (same
as in musl). but the standard requires mcontext_t there,
not an union of pointers, so the powerpc linux abi is broken.
to access gpregs in glibc you can use either of
(pt_regs*) ucp->uc_mcontext.regs
(mcontext_t*) ucp->uc_mcontext.uc_regs
in musl it's
(mcontext_t*) ucp->uc_regs
the pointers may point to the tail of the ucontext_t struct
where musl has its ucp->uc_mcontext field with the right type,
but i don't know if that's guaranteed.
so the standard conform way (using ucp->uc_mcontext) to
access the registers is not reliable. you can try to use the
non-standard uc_regs pointer:
#ifdef __GLIBC__
#define uc_regs uc_mcontext.uc_regs
#endif
#define SIGSEGV_FAULT_STACKPOINTER ((ucontext_t *) ucp)->uc_regs->gregs[1]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
