This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Saving errno around signal handlers


On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 09:41:14AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 03/01/2014 01:31 AM, Rich Felker wrote:
> >On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 05:58:54PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >>On 02/28/2014 05:49 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> >>>On 02/28/2014 03:49 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>In all cases (kernel and glibc implementation), we can use a tail call to make
> >>>>sure that the stack layout looks like it is at present (at least on
> >>>>architectures with an available callee-saved register), and we would not have
> >>>>to adjust GDB and other tools.
> >>>
> >>>How's that?  A tail call would not be able to "restore" anything afterward.
> >>
> >>We already have the restorer that calls sigreturn, and could add
> >>
> >>         movq    errno@gottpoff(%rip), %rdi
> >>         movl    %r12d, %fs:(%rdi)
> >>
> >>right before that.
> >
> >This does not support nested signal handlers. The saved errno must be
> >on the stack frame of the trampoline calling the real signal handler,
> >not a fixed TLS location.
> 
> In this example, the saved errno value is in the %r12d register,
> which is callee-saved, and I suppose that should address your
> concern.

Oh, I misread the code's use of %fs-relative addressing as storing the
saved errno there rather than accessing the thread-local errno. Never
mind.

Rich


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]