Hi Charalampos,
Please see my comments inline.
On 8/22/19 7:06 PM, Charalampos Mainas wrote:
> Signed-off by: Charalampos Mainas <charalampos.mainas@xxxxxxxxx>
s/Signed-off by/Signed-off-by/g
> ---
> lib/ukucontext/include/ucontext.h | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/ukucontext/include/ucontext.h b/lib/ukucontext/include/ucontext.h
> index eb83ce24..07837882 100644
> --- a/lib/ukucontext/include/ucontext.h
> +++ b/lib/ukucontext/include/ucontext.h
> @@ -59,6 +59,9 @@ typedef struct {
> } mcontext_t;
> #endif
>
> +// Conflict with sigset_t from newlib. Using same definition as in musl
> +typedef struct { unsigned long __bits[128/sizeof(long)]; } uco_sigset_t;
> +
> struct sigaltstack {
> void *ss_sp;
> int ss_flags;
> @@ -68,9 +71,9 @@ struct sigaltstack {
> typedef struct __ucontext {
> unsigned long uc_flags;
> struct __ucontext *uc_link;
> - stack_t uc_stack;
> + struct sigaltstack uc_stack;
Why don't we add the stack_t type definition instead?
stack_t is defined as struct sigaltstack in include/signal.h (in musl) and has the same
definition in newlib.I thought it would be better to stick with how musl defines it and
do not depend on newlib.
> mcontext_t uc_mcontext;
> - sigset_t uc_sigmask;
> + uco_sigset_t uc_sigmask;
Isn't this supposed to be actually inline with the sigset_t definition?
What don't we use the newlib's type definition?
Musl defines sigset_t in a different way than newlib. (in newlib is defined as unsigned long
and in musl as above) However glibc has the same definition with newlib, so we should follow
newlib's definition.
